HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » If the main Dem contender...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 03:33 PM

If the main Dem contenders for 2016 are Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren, who would you support?


40 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
Elizabeth Warren
19 (48%)
Hillary Clinton
21 (53%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

21 replies, 1792 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 21 replies Author Time Post
Reply If the main Dem contenders for 2016 are Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren, who would you support? (Original post)
Cali_Democrat Feb 2013 OP
Jackpine Radical Feb 2013 #1
HERVEPA Feb 2013 #2
jehop61 Feb 2013 #3
msongs Feb 2013 #5
graham4anything Feb 2013 #7
Scuba Feb 2013 #4
graham4anything Feb 2013 #6
MrYikes Feb 2013 #8
awoke_in_2003 Feb 2013 #9
Beacool Feb 2013 #10
Yavin4 Feb 2013 #13
Beacool Feb 2013 #19
cali Feb 2013 #21
Rochester Feb 2013 #11
NYC Liberal Feb 2013 #12
Grown2Hate Feb 2013 #14
davidpdx Feb 2013 #15
Adenoid_Hynkel Feb 2013 #16
RudynJack Feb 2013 #17
leftynyc Feb 2013 #18
Arkana Feb 2013 #20

Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 03:35 PM

1. Warren.

No doubt about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 03:37 PM

2. Warren, unless I thought Hillary had a much better chance of winning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 03:40 PM

3. I believe

We should give Sen. Warren time to get experience before passing judgement one way or another. She has much to learn before being ready to tackle the entire govt. She has much potential, but it's only been 4 weeks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jehop61 (Reply #3)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 03:43 PM

5. 4 years as senator is enuff to learn mechanics, the rest is vision, integrity, and leadership nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #5)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 03:47 PM

7. excuse the interuption but-it takes 3 years to run for President these days

 

Hillary did not run during her first term as Senator.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 03:40 PM

4. This one ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 03:45 PM

6. It won't happen. Warren won't run if Hillary does.

 

Whomever is the nominee gets my support.

I would back Hillary because she can beat Jeb/Rubio or Jeb/Christie.
It takes a Clinton to defeat a Bush.

I am not positive Warren could beat Christie, and after what the Bush family did to Dukakis, who also was a big liberal from Mass. I do not think Warren would be able to easily defeat
Jeb Bush.

Warren or Hillary can beat all the other candidates with ease.(including Ryan,Rand,Santorium,
Huckabee,and whomever else there is.)

But it's Jeb/Rubio or Jeb/Christie that is the key and it takes Hillary Clinton to beat them.

(And again, Hillary would easily have beaten McCain in 2008.)

But it won't happen.
The two won't run against each other.

And I would rather in Jan.2017 have Hillary as President45, and Elizabeth Warren as head liberal in the senate pushing legislation through. That is a win/win.

IF for whatever reason Hillary did not run, Elizabeth Warren or Janet Napolitano would be my choice.

And as we now finally all agree age doesn't matter, maybe we can all dream that the VP would
be Jerry Brown. (for either candidate.) Wouldn't that be a fitting coda to his career?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 03:52 PM

8. Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 07:25 PM

9. I voted Warren...

as we have had enough presidential dynasties

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 09:12 PM

10. You people enamored with Warren are dreaming if you think that she could win the presidency in 2016.

She barely managed to win a Senate seat in one of the bluest states. I think that she will be a great senator, but trying to sell her at the national level is just a left wing fantasy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #10)

Fri Feb 22, 2013, 12:42 AM

13. Funny. You could have posted the same thing in 2007. n/t

Just replace Warren with Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #13)

Fri Feb 22, 2013, 09:09 AM

19. Obama had some legislative experience.

Warren had zip, zero, nada until she ran for the Senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yavin4 (Reply #13)

Fri Feb 22, 2013, 11:09 AM

21. um, no. you certainly could not

Not only did Obama serve 8 years in the Illinois Senate, but he had previously run for Congress. Not to mention that he had a much higher profile, national backing, powerful Congressional support and is possessed of far superior political skills.

Very different.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink