HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Who should lead the Democ...

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 03:04 PM

Who should lead the Democratic Party in 2016

Barack Obama received about 135 million votes total in his two Presidential elections, and made history:

“Barack Obama is the first president in more than five decades to win at least 51 percent of the national popular vote twice, according to a revised vote count in New York eight weeks after the Nov. 6 election,” Bloomberg writes, adding, “The president nationally won 65.9 million votes -- or 51.1 percent -- against Republican challenger Mitt Romney, who took 60.9 million votes and 47.2 percent of the total cast, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Obama is the first president to achieve the 51 percent mark in two elections since Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower, who did it in 1952 and 1956, and the first Democrat to do so since Franklin D. Roosevelt, who won four consecutive White House races. Roosevelt received 53.4 percent of the vote -- his lowest -- in his last race in 1944.”

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/04/16348268-obama-agenda-first-since-ike-to-win-51-back-to-back


The Democratic Party has momentum. Who should be the candidate in 2016?
35 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
Elizabeth Warren
25 (71%)
Hillary Clinton
7 (20%)
Howard Dean
2 (6%)
Other (specify)
1 (3%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

119 replies, 7510 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 119 replies Author Time Post
Reply Who should lead the Democratic Party in 2016 (Original post)
ProSense Mar 2013 OP
cali Mar 2013 #1
Little Star Mar 2013 #9
whatchamacallit Mar 2013 #18
cali Mar 2013 #22
whatchamacallit Mar 2013 #24
duffyduff Mar 2013 #31
winter is coming Mar 2013 #40
cali Mar 2013 #57
progressoid Mar 2013 #44
onehandle Mar 2013 #74
cali Mar 2013 #88
PennsylvaniaMatt Mar 2013 #112
Pararescue Mar 2013 #2
NYC_SKP Mar 2013 #3
Mira Mar 2013 #89
pennylane100 Mar 2013 #4
LWolf Mar 2013 #5
ProSense Mar 2013 #6
LWolf Mar 2013 #12
ProSense Mar 2013 #14
name not needed Mar 2013 #45
Lydia Leftcoast Mar 2013 #65
Little Star Mar 2013 #7
JDPriestly Mar 2013 #108
truebluegreen Mar 2013 #114
truebluegreen Mar 2013 #115
Buzz Clik Mar 2013 #8
ProSense Mar 2013 #11
babylonsister Mar 2013 #41
DJ13 Mar 2013 #54
Frosty1 Mar 2013 #104
Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2013 #10
Lasher Mar 2013 #113
gravity Mar 2013 #13
blm Mar 2013 #16
fadedrose Mar 2013 #37
blm Mar 2013 #60
fadedrose Mar 2013 #38
karynnj Mar 2013 #102
fadedrose Mar 2013 #117
AsahinaKimi Mar 2013 #15
ProSense Mar 2013 #27
Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2013 #17
whatchamacallit Mar 2013 #20
Recursion Mar 2013 #19
1-Old-Man Mar 2013 #21
ProSense Mar 2013 #23
RC Mar 2013 #25
Little Star Mar 2013 #30
JDPriestly Mar 2013 #109
babylonsister Mar 2013 #42
RKP5637 Mar 2013 #26
JDPriestly Mar 2013 #110
Jumpin Jack Fletch Mar 2013 #28
ProSense Mar 2013 #29
duffyduff Mar 2013 #32
JaneyVee Mar 2013 #33
FarCenter Mar 2013 #34
FarCenter Mar 2013 #35
Jim Lane Mar 2013 #50
JDPriestly Mar 2013 #111
Comrade Grumpy Mar 2013 #53
ProSense Mar 2013 #43
Comrade Grumpy Mar 2013 #51
Bluenorthwest Mar 2013 #36
roxy1234 Mar 2013 #39
name not needed Mar 2013 #46
flvegan Mar 2013 #47
Jackpine Radical Mar 2013 #77
Rowdyboy Mar 2013 #48
brooklynite Mar 2013 #49
Jackpine Radical Mar 2013 #78
brooklynite Mar 2013 #86
Jackpine Radical Mar 2013 #97
Rochester Mar 2013 #52
Beacool Mar 2013 #67
jonthebru Mar 2013 #55
Demo_Chris Mar 2013 #56
ProSense Mar 2013 #58
Demo_Chris Mar 2013 #59
ProSense Mar 2013 #61
Demo_Chris Mar 2013 #62
ProSense Mar 2013 #63
Demo_Chris Mar 2013 #75
ProSense Mar 2013 #80
Demo_Chris Mar 2013 #90
ProSense Mar 2013 #98
Demo_Chris Mar 2013 #100
Beacool Mar 2013 #68
Whisp Mar 2013 #91
Beacool Mar 2013 #92
Whisp Mar 2013 #94
Beacool Mar 2013 #96
Whisp Mar 2013 #99
Beacool Mar 2013 #64
ProSense Mar 2013 #66
Beacool Mar 2013 #69
ProSense Mar 2013 #70
Beacool Mar 2013 #71
ProSense Mar 2013 #73
Beacool Mar 2013 #81
ProSense Mar 2013 #83
Whisp Mar 2013 #106
Beacool Mar 2013 #107
Dpm12 Mar 2013 #72
JustAnotherGen Mar 2013 #76
Recursion Mar 2013 #79
fredamae Mar 2013 #82
fredamae Mar 2013 #85
Egalitarian Thug Mar 2013 #84
99Forever Mar 2013 #87
Enrique Mar 2013 #93
Whisp Mar 2013 #95
bluedigger Mar 2013 #101
AnotherMcIntosh Mar 2013 #103
graham4anything Mar 2013 #105
truebluegreen Mar 2013 #116
derby378 Mar 2013 #118
Beacool Mar 2013 #119

Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 03:07 PM

1. Not Elizabeth Warren.

 

Unless you want a repub president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #1)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 03:14 PM

9. bingo

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #1)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 04:16 PM

18. Um... are you saying

we need to vote for someone less liberal and closer to a republican, to avoid a republican?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to whatchamacallit (Reply #18)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 04:35 PM

22. Uh, no. Not saying that at all. Saying she is a) not an experienced politician

 

She's run for office once and her performance was not brilliant. It got better as time went on but it was no more than competent at best.

She has no record yet. I don't like her stance on Iran. It's certainly not liberal.

And no, it's not like Obama. He had served 8 years in the Illinois Senate, and run for the House. He has mad political skills and he had the backing needed. It's highly unlikely she will.

She's just not ready for 2016.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #22)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 04:59 PM

24. Ah I see...

From that perspective, I guess I can't really disagree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to whatchamacallit (Reply #24)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 07:28 PM

31. I can

 

Obama had only two years on the national stage--statehouse politics doesn't count for squat unless one is a governor.

Warren is also a nationally-recognized SCHOLAR, which Obama never was. That more than compensates for lack of elected experience.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to duffyduff (Reply #31)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 08:34 PM

40. I've known nationally-recognized scholars who would make piss-poor Presidents.

That said, I'd be happy to support Elizabeth Warren anytime, anywhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to duffyduff (Reply #31)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 09:22 AM

57. of course statehouse politics counts. duh

 

it's engaging in the mechanics of a campaign. It's getting out there amongst voters. It's being involved in the nitty gritty of politics. It counts a helll of a lot.

I hate to break this to you, hon, but being a scholar doesn't count for shit in politics. Not when it comes to the electorate and the largely anti intellectual streak in this country that's a mile wide.

Warren is not a natural when it comes to politicking and she doesn't have much experience with it and she sure as shit doesn't have the coalitions behind her that you need to mount a successful national campaign.

This is like ABC stuff. It's duh stuff. It's as fucking basic as it gets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #1)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 10:10 PM

44. Yeah, she'll have to make some great advances in the next two years

to even be in the running.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #1)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 12:02 PM

74. Not Barack Obama. Unless you want a repub president...

...is what Many were saying about him in 2008.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #74)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:12 PM

88. well, I was not one of them. Or in 2007

 

why? because I have the brains to discern the differences between the two. You do too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #74)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 05:02 PM

112. There were many Democrats, including myself, saying the OPPOSITE

Barack Obama was, and still is in fact, charismatic, intelligent, and articulate, and that was in addition to the historical significance of him being the first African-American to be a party nominee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 03:07 PM

2. I like Elizabeth Warren,

 

she's not afraid to stand up for what she believes in and she has the fire in her heart to do what's in the best interests of the american people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 03:08 PM

3. Elizabeth Warren as President, Howard Dean as head of Democratic Party. (nt)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #3)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:14 PM

89. Seconded n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 03:08 PM

4. I voted for Elizabethg

but any of those choices would be fine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 03:11 PM

5. Other:

A strong coalition of Democrats who will stand against neoliberals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LWolf (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 03:11 PM

6. Any suggestions? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LWolf (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 03:33 PM

12. I don't have any particular individuals in mind.

I don't really care who they are, as long as they are not neoliberals.

That narrows the pool of choices, obviously.

I'd start with Bernie Sanders, but he's not a Democrat. Here are some possibilities:

Alan Grayson
Jeff Merkley
Maxine Waters
Barbara Lee

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LWolf (Reply #12)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 03:51 PM

14. Thanks for the list. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LWolf (Reply #12)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 10:17 PM

45. Maxine Waters?

Will she even make it to 2016 without being indicted?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LWolf (Reply #5)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 11:27 AM

65. That would assume that the Dem Establishment wouldn't marginalize and ridicule them

and primary them with Republican Lite types.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 03:13 PM

7. As much as I like & admire Elizabeth I don't think she could win the 2016 election....

I want Hillary & I think she can beat even their best perceived candidate Jeb Bush. Them's my two cents. I want to win 2016, period.

Bring on Hillary if we want to kick Repub ass!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Little Star (Reply #7)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 04:49 PM

108. Hillary is not the right age. She tires easily and will tire

even more easily in four years.

I know. I'm about four years older than she is. And I doubt that she is in as good health as I am.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Little Star (Reply #7)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 07:59 PM

114. Jeb Bush just flip-flopped on immigration reform,

 

that is, a path to citizenship.

He's not going to win a general election with that, especially since his ability to appeal to Hispanics was one of his biggest selling points.

And then, of course, there's the name.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truebluegreen (Reply #114)


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 03:14 PM

8. Dennis Rodman.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #8)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 03:24 PM

11. Isn't he running in North Korea?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #8)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 08:34 PM

41. Bwhahaha!

Oye! Maybe the rethugs will draft him!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #8)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 02:05 AM

54. He could be his own First Lady!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DJ13 (Reply #54)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 03:19 PM

104. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 03:17 PM

10. ]"History has tried to teach us that we can't have good government under politicians

 

"History has tried to teach us that we can't have good government under politicians. Now, to go and stick one at the very head of government couldn't be wise." Mark Twain

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #10)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 06:00 PM

113. One thing I have learned from history...

is that we don't learn from history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 03:33 PM

13. Hillary will give the Republicans hell

I like Warren too, but I see her as too professorial and lacks the gravitas to really bring the fight to the rabid Republican party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gravity (Reply #13)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 04:08 PM

16. Do you have examples of Hillary giving the GOP hell when she was a senator?

What important issues did Hillary lead Dems in the Senate, or lead a fight against Bush?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #16)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 08:25 PM

37. I can't think of any...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fadedrose (Reply #37)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 09:31 AM

60. exactly...it's all MYTH that some Dems have learned to repeat unquestioningly.

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #16)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 08:29 PM

38. At the Benghazi hearing...

she did not become aggressive with any Senators, Dem or Rep., but only managed to become angry with a "mere" republican congressman who's in for 2 years....hmmm, and I can't remember his name..

Senators John Cain and his stooge Lindsey Graham were extremely aggressive and rude, but met with no such anger....just sayin' .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fadedrose (Reply #38)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 02:56 PM

102. Johnson, the Republican tea party guy who beat Feingold

One off target thought, had he won, Feingold might be the Chair of SFRC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #102)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 08:44 PM

117. It was a congressman that I was thinking of, not a Senator...

somebody in the House . .but she wasn't nice to Johnson either... .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 04:03 PM

15. I'm going to wait for 2016

before I make a choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AsahinaKimi (Reply #15)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 06:06 PM

27. Sensible?

Likely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 04:11 PM

17. Not Hillary or any other 3rd Way Democrat.

 

Enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #17)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 04:19 PM

20. I'm with you

and this time I won't let someone's bullshit assessment of electability be the driver of my choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 04:18 PM

19. Schweitzer? O'Malley? Tester? Hassan?

I think given the unpopularity of Congress right now, we should look for a governor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 04:28 PM

21. What a horribly limited list. I doubt it will be any one of those three

And I'll be honest with you I don't see anyone on the horizon that looks like a potentially great Presidential candidate. There are plenty of people that I like a lot who don't stand a chance, there are plenty of old names in the Party that not only won't run, but don't have any business running, but we have no real stars rising, at least not on the national level. I would be wise of us to find and begin promoting some sound people, but other than go to the state governments we have very little to work with and even there the pickings are slim.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1-Old-Man (Reply #21)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 04:40 PM

23. Hence: Other

Hillary is the name thrown out the most. Warren is very popular.

"And I'll be honest with you I don't see anyone on the horizon that looks like a potentially great Presidential candidate...I would be wise of us to find and begin promoting some sound people, but other than go to the state governments we have very little to work with and even there the pickings are slim."

Have you ever noticed that despite all the complaining, that never happens? People push one candidate or another based on a single issue, but such candidates are rarely successful.

This is a big country. It takes a lot of appeal to get tens of millions of votes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #23)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 05:16 PM

25. Electing Hillary would be a continuation of the current problems.

 

She is another 3rd Way Democrat. Being a Democrat does not mean what it used to. Being for the Worker, the common person. The Democratic party leadership currently is to the Right of Richard Nixon. Most Democratic Congress Critters are on the same pocket as the bought off Republicans. But, we don't seem to care, as long as they are not as bad as the Republicans. Think frog in pot on stove.

DU has many unthinking members that use only the labels, such as (D) and (R) to differentiate between between the 'good guys' and the 'bad guys'. Hence, even though they campaign for "Democrats", the reality is that they are campaigning for the further swing of the Democratic Party to the Right. We need to go back the other way, to the Left. But first, we must pass over Center, to be on that Left. Being the shadow of the Republicans is clearly not working very well for us, U.S.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #23)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 06:53 PM

30. I only wish your poll had asked who do you think has the best shot of winning instead of...

who do you want to win. Because I think we are all responding with a different idea in mind and what does that really tell us?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #23)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 04:52 PM

109. We should look at Congressman Xavier Becerra.

He is great. Intelligent, a Stanford grad, gets along well with people. He has strong experience in the House, understands the issues like no one I know of. He would be great. But he does not like to raise money as I understand it, so he would have to be drafted.

A couple of big pluses: he speaks Spanish and is a common-sense Catholic.

He is my congressman and really wonderful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1-Old-Man (Reply #21)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 08:35 PM

42. The good news is we have

a lot more good people to work with than the rethugs do. Think positive!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 05:19 PM

26. Elizabeth Warren doesn't have the depth of experience as does Hillary

Clinton, does she?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #26)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 04:55 PM

110. That puts Elizabeth Warren at an advantage.

Clinton is too conservative. She was a hawk on Iraq and supports the military too enthusiastically.

Also, she has Walmart ties in the past -- served on the Walmart board. I don't think that will be a plus in 2016.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 06:26 PM

28. YOU, ProSense!

 

Isn't it obvious?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jumpin Jack Fletch (Reply #28)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 06:44 PM

29. ProSense 2016



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 07:30 PM

32. No Andrew Cuomo or Cory Booker

 

If either of them gets the nod, I will officially quit the Democratic Party.

They are THAT bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 07:38 PM

33. Richard Trumka for Prez, Paul Krugman for VP, Elizabeth Warren for Senate MAJORITY leader

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 07:41 PM

34. Here are the current Democratic Governors -- mostly they are WTF?

 

Andrew Cuomo
Dan Malloy
Deval Patrick
Earl Ray Tomblin
Jack Markell
Jay Inslee
Jay Nixon
Jerry Brown
John Hickenlooper
John Kitzhaber
Maggie Hassan
Mark Dayton
Martin O'Malley
Mike Beebe
Neil Abercrombie
Pat Quinn
Peter Shumlin
Steve Beshear
Steve Bullock

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarCenter (Reply #34)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 07:50 PM

35. Here are the current Senators - a fine collection of inexperience and has-beens.

 

Al Franken
Amy Klobuchar
Barbara Boxer
Barbara Mikulski
Ben Cardin
Bill Nelson
Bob Casey, Jr.
Bob Menendez
Brian Schatz
Carl Levin
Chris Coons
Chris Murphy
Chuck Schumer
Claire McCaskill
Debbie Stabenow
Dianne Feinstein
Dick Durbin
Elizabeth Warren
Frank Lautenberg
Harry Reid
Heidi Heitkamp
Jack Reed
Jay Rockefeller
Jeanne Shaheen
Jeff Merkley
Joe Donnelly
Joe Manchin
Jon Tester
Kay Hagan
Kirsten Gillibrand
Maria Cantwell
Mark Begich
Mark Pryor
Mark Udall
Mark Warner
Martin Heinrich
Mary Landrieu
Max Baucus
Mazie Hirono
Michael Bennet
Mo Cowan
Patrick Leahy
Patty Murray
Richard Blumenthal
Ron Wyden
Sheldon Whitehouse
Sherrod Brown
Tammy Baldwin
Tim Johnson
Tim Kaine
Tom Carper
Tom Harkin
Tom Udall

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarCenter (Reply #35)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:46 AM

50. A couple bright lights on that list:

 

I've heard presidential talk about Sherrod Brown (born 1952; Senator since 2007, before that 14 years in the House, before that posts in Ohio state government) and Sheldon Whitehouse (born 1955; Senator since 2007, before that posts in the Department of Justice and Rhode Island state government).

Each of them is too young to be a has-been but has a decent level of experience. So, which of your pejorative categories are you selecting for them?

This is not to say that others on the list should be ruled out. These were just the first two that came to my mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #50)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 04:58 PM

111. Sherrod Brown is great for those of us who follow politics,

but I think he has a problem for national elections. This is very hard for me to say, but he would have to explain why his voice always sounds so hoarse. He has a problem projecting strength because of his voice.

As one who has a certain understanding of the human voice, I have to say that Hillary's voice would also work against her just as Sarah Palin's voice and accent made her sound silly.

Grayson has a great voice. Elizabeth Warren can have a pretty good voice.

No one has a voice like Obama.

So why is this important? Because we do judge people by their voices more than most of us are willing to admit.

Obama's voice has gotten him very far in life.

The voice, most of us seem to believe on a subconscious level, is the mirror of the soul. The voice betrays us. It can reveal our impatience, our arrogance, our subservience, our fear, our love, our anger, just about everything we think or feel or are shows in our voice.

I could go on and on about this. But don't ever underestimate the importance of a good voice in politics. Makes all the difference in close races.

I should remind everyone of Al Gore's voice. I liked it, but his pronunciation sounded constrained like someone trying to sound better than he really thought he was. People picked up on it. On the other hand, phony though it was, GWBush had mastered the "I'm just a down-home kinda' guy" voice and had everyone who voted for him fooled -- especially the proud to be from the country folks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarCenter (Reply #35)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:54 AM

53. Go, Leahy!

 

Wow, of the governors and the senators, both my favorites are old bald guys.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarCenter (Reply #34)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 09:33 PM

43. Not a fan of Democrats? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarCenter (Reply #34)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:52 AM

51. That's kind of sad. Jerry Brown 2016: "He Must Have Exhaled By Now"?

 

I kind of like Jerry Brown, but he's old.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 08:20 PM

36. Jeff Merkley would be fine with me, thanks.

 

So would a few others. It's very early, so I'll say Merkley/Grayson or vice versa,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 08:31 PM

39. Not Hillary Clinton

 

They have done enough public service for the country. Elizabeth Warren ftw

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Sun Mar 3, 2013, 10:19 PM

46. If there's any hope of preserving the progress made over the past four years,

you're going to need somebody that can be the LBJ to Obama's JFK, and Hillary fits the bill.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 12:58 AM

47. Dennis Kucinich.

That won't work for the paper tiger democrats here, of which there are many. But, that wasn't part of the answer.

Paper Tiger Democrats. Own it, because it is all you are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flvegan (Reply #47)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 12:23 PM

77. Kucinich also won't work for the electorate.

He is his own caricature.

Hillary has the best chance of being elected--unfortunately.

That is because she has the best chance of securing corporate funding and of continuing the sellout of liberal and progressive principles. Those two facts are not unrelated.

It's getting to the point that I just don't see conventional electoral politics as a viable avenue to the things we need to do in the interest of species survival.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:09 AM

48. Lydia the Tatooed Lady will do if she's running against the 2016 Republican nominee

whoever that pathetic sack of excrement may be.

Hillary, Elizabeth, Joe, Andrew, Martin, Brian-anyone we could concievably nominate under any imaginable circumstances would be heads above their pick and I will go along with whatever the party en masse decides. I'm expecting Hillary but I'll take any of our guys happily. Bur Lydia would be good too!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:16 AM

49. UNREC

No objection to a poll, but this is far to small and skewed sa list (Dean and Warren not running) to provide an informed response.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #49)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 12:24 PM

78. Your additions would be welcomed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #78)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:08 PM

86. Andrew Cuomo, Martin O'Malley, Brian Schweitzer and Joe Biden are all considering runs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #86)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:51 PM

97. Any opinions you'd like to share on that roster? Or in general?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:53 AM

52. Hillary 2016 & 2020. Lizzie 2024 & 2028

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rochester (Reply #52)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 11:32 AM

67. Warren would be too old by then to be considered.

She's a tad less than two years younger than Hillary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 03:13 AM

55. Obviously the person who can beat any republican crook who runs.

I didn't cast a vote in this poll, its too early.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 05:04 AM

56. We need to see what Warren DOES before getting all twitterpainted

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demo_Chris (Reply #56)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 09:23 AM

58. "Twitterpainted"?

She's clearly more popular than Hillary, and likely based on what she has done thus far.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #58)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 09:26 AM

59. Here you go

 



What exactly has she done thus far other than getting elected. Note, I am completely open to supporting her if she decides to run for President -- assuming I think she has what it takes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demo_Chris (Reply #59)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 09:33 AM

61. I don't think that's going to change anyone's mind about Warren. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #61)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 09:38 AM

62. I don't WANT to change anyone's mind about Warren

 

I want to know what she has actually done. Anyone can sound progressive on the campaign trail. It's what you do once you are in there that counts. I suspect the answer to this is nothing, but that's not exactly shocking considering they haven't had a chance to do anything yet.

And so you know, I am reconsidering my position on Hillary for reasons that I am too lazy to type here right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demo_Chris (Reply #62)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 11:07 AM

63. So

"I don't WANT to change anyone's mind about Warren

I want to know what she has actually done. Anyone can sound progressive on the campaign trail...And so you know, I am reconsidering my position on Hillary for reasons that I am too lazy to type here right now."

...given that you knew what Hillary has done, how did you end up supporting her, but having doubts about Warren?

Warren is no longer on "the campaign trail."

Elizabeth Warren Embarrasses Hapless Bank Regulators At First Hearing
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022377143

WARREN TO BERNANKE: "So when are we gonna get rid of 'too big to fail?'"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022434722

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #63)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 12:03 PM

75. Fair questions

 

Hillary obviously has as track record and perhaps the best resume in the world. She is, however, a Clinton, and until she distances herself from her husband's positions on free trade and what not, I find myself struggling to support her. After Obama, I am officially a skeptic. I don't trust any of them.

Warren is, so far, a complete unknown. She sort of grilled some bankers. That's nice, but it is something we aught to expect from anyone confronting those jackals. That this is noteworthy says a great deal about our party. The question I am asking myself is this: What could Warren do that would convince me she is a real progressive? There is no simple answer to this, other than time.

If she wants my support she needs to be out there every day taking on big businesses and corporations, confronting Fox news, advancing the liberal agenda. So far, by my count, within a week of winning she was sending out fund raising letters to help pay off her debt, and she basically did it again just a few weeks ago -- though this time she is theoretically setting up her own PAC.

So I would say this. She needs to stop asking for cash and begin showing what she is all about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demo_Chris (Reply #75)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 12:30 PM

80. Wait

"Hillary obviously has as track record and perhaps the best resume in the world. She is, however, a Clinton, and until she distances herself from her husband's positions on free trade and what not, I find myself struggling to support her. After Obama, I am officially a skeptic. I don't trust any of them."

...you're considering pulling support for someone who has "the best resume in the world." How did you determine that?

She has her own record. She ran in 2008. Why would you need to hear how she feels about President Clinton's record to make a determination?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #80)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:16 PM

90. First Lady, Senator, Sec State, international respect ... that's one hell of a resume.

 

But that's no longer enough for me. I want a progressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demo_Chris (Reply #90)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:58 PM

98. So you

"First Lady, Senator, Sec State, international respect ... that's one hell of a resume. But that's no longer enough for me. I want a progressive. "

...were only considering her titles when you supported her?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #98)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 02:48 PM

100. No. But I don't want to get into it right now. Perhaps another day n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #58)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 11:36 AM

68. More popular with who?

The left wing? Hillary is the most popular politician in the nation by far, and has been so for a considerable amount of time. Remember that DU is not a reflection of the real world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #68)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:27 PM

91. coke and pepsi are pretty popular too, but are they good for you? n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #91)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:30 PM

92. Well, look who showed up?

Yes, and Hillary is Coke, while Warren is RC Cola. Who do you think would win in a popularity contest?





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #92)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:36 PM

94. I was about to say the same! We seem to like the same parties.

 

Hillary may be very popular now because not many really know about her Keystone stuff, her Honduras fiasco and the details of Syria may come out soon too. And there is more to Benghazi and Hillary's ineptness and selfish self preservation in that, than we are allowed to know at the moment.

I don't think her popularity will hold when these things come out in the sunlight - so far they have been fogged in and hidden but if she runs she will have to cope with a loss of popularity when some of these truths come out. And there will be more, lots more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #94)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:43 PM

96. Nonsense.

Hillary was the SOS, not the president. The president sets foreign policy, the SOS implements it.

She will remain the most popular politician that the party will have next election cycle. Of course her popularity will come down somewhat if she does choose to run. But as of now, she's still the best hope the Democrats have of keeping the WH in 2016.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #96)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:59 PM

99. for such a strong and popular SoS in all of known and unknown history

 

she sure didn't have much responsibility, did she?

because it seems when things don't go right, why, it's Obama's fault! What is it she was responsible for as SoS then? Only the good things? Does Obama get credit for those too? (Actually I don't kow what these good things are but I'm sure there are some).

Do you think Obama assigns people to do their work themselves and trusts they will follow his vision or do you think Obama should have been watching over Hillary all the time?

He has a lot on his plate for all his Presidency so babysitting his staff is not really practical, is it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 11:24 AM

64. Elizabeth Warren in 2016 is nothing more than a LW fantasy.

I like her and think that she'll one day become a great Senator (similar to Teddy), but she just entered politics last year and barely won her senate seat in a very blue state.

She doesn't have the popularity, name brand, experience and money raising capacity to run a presidential campaign in the next two years. Allow her to remain in the Senate where her contribution could be felt for years to come.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #64)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 11:30 AM

66. Does that make Hillary a RW fantasy? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #66)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 11:44 AM

69. No, it makes her a center/left Democrat.

Same as Obama, for that matter. Warren is as much of a fantasy for the left as the Tea Party politicians are for the right. Neither type could win a presidential election. That's why this last cycle the Republicans ended with someone like Romney, almost every other candidate that ran was far too conservative. The left wing of the party would be making the same mistake if they tried to push Warren to run in 2016. It would be a sure way to give the presidency to the Republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #69)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 11:46 AM

70. That's

"Warren is as much of a fantasy for the left as the Tea Party politicians are for the right."

...patently absurd.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #70)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 11:52 AM

71. No, it isn't.

It's an objective analysis based on many years of political experience.

BTW, we do not even know if Hillary is interested in running in 2016. But, if the choice were between Hillary and Warren as the party nominee, there's no doubt in my mind that Hillary would have a much better chance of winning against the Republican nominee. I would say the same even if I didn't support her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #71)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 12:00 PM

73. Well,

"BTW, we do not even know if Hillary is interested in running in 2016. But, if the choice were between Hillary and Warren as the party nominee, there's no doubt in my mind that Hillary would have a much better chance of winning against the Republican nominee. I would say the same even if I didn't support her."

...at least you know that is your opinion. The fact that you're not sure if Hillary is running, but you are here denouning Democratic support for Warren as a "fantasy for the left as the Tea Party politicians are for the right" is ludicrous.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #73)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 12:33 PM

81. Whatever..........

I really don't care. You can push anyone, it doesn't really matter to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #81)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 12:42 PM

83. Gee,

You can push anyone, it doesn't really matter to me.

...thanks for my freedom.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beacool (Reply #69)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 03:23 PM

106. Please don't insult the Presdent by saying he is the same as a Clinton.

 

That's nauseous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #106)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 03:52 PM

107. That sentence works both ways, sweetie.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 11:55 AM

72. I'd like to see

Joe Biden as the candidate personally

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 12:11 PM

76. Will bookmark

And come back and respond in 2014.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 12:24 PM

79. Whoever "should", who "will" is those who show up at their precinct meetings

Now is the time to do the gruntwork if you want more of a say in the selection process in a few years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 12:34 PM

82. Warren is the Best

choice--and I could be wrong--but she is not electable by majority because of her "liberal views"...
I love HRC too--but, I'm not holding out that she'll really run and if she does---will she represent all of Us or remain a "traditional DC Pol"?
Bottom line: Instead of recycling "embedded politicians" who are basically of the Same traditional mindset of assuring economic security for the wealthy, corporations, banks/wall street, wars etc--We need to recruit, vet, run New people with dynamic visions And The Courage and Will To Stand Toe-To-Toe with the crooks and NOT Cave into Hostage Demands. What we are Capable of as a Whole is beyond our imaginations but WE are being Held Back By those in Power--just follow the money and the verbal diarrhea we are presented with.
The great ones are out there and hiding from us because they know how "it" works and they want No part of it
We can't do this by 2016--but maybe and If we still are Allowed to Vote and All districts are not yet Gerrymandered to ensure victory for the GOP--we must start Today for 2020.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fredamae (Reply #82)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 12:59 PM

85. And Gerrymandering-The Fix

Progresses! Remember, by popular vote--We actually Won back, by the Peoples Vote-the US Congress, but because of Gerrymandering We Lost-Officially.


http://hotair.com/archives/2011/09/13/oh-my-pennsylvania-weighing-bill-to-allocate-electoral-votes-by-congressional-district/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 12:42 PM

84. At this point the best chance to avoid yet another moderate republican is a celebrity.

 

They are the only group left that can garner support from a wide spectrum of the population and are both capable and free to promote a beneficial agenda.
2 ˘

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:10 PM

87. I think we should amend the Constitution to..

... allow President Obama a third term, 'cuz he's just that great.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:32 PM

93. Karen Lewis

head of Chicago teachers union.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 01:43 PM

95. Patty Murray is one to watch, Schweitzer too

 

and Janet Napolitano has pretty well thrown her hat in the ring.

there are lots of fairly good peeps out there and also lots of time for more to pop up.

Whatever happens, 2016 will be another hugely interesting election year.

I only hope that whoever takes over continues with obama's good works and doesn't take us all back to that old way of messing in others governments and shaking fists at others instead of practicing diplomacy.

It would be a crying shame to lose all the hard and good work that the Obama admin has done. But that can surely happen if care is not taken on who the torch is passed along to. Not all Democrats are democratic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 02:53 PM

101. Too soon to call.

Last edited Mon Mar 4, 2013, 05:01 PM - Edit history (1)

Warren looks good, but let's give her some time to accomplish something. Anybody that shows effective leadership in addressing the nation's problems will get my attention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 03:03 PM

103. Richard Trumka

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 03:20 PM

105. Hillary45/Janet Napolitano or Hillary45/Biden or Hillary45/Jerry Brown

 

or Hillary45/Charlie Crist

and in 2024 Michelle Obama

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 08:05 PM

116. I'll say it again, Warren/Grayson 2016!

 

And yes, Howard Dean for DNC chair.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Mar 4, 2013, 09:07 PM

118. Howard Dean DEFINITELY needs to be brought back in from the cold

A lot of the party's higher-ups, especially those with ties to the DLC, turned their backs on Dean after he voiced opposition to the developing Obamacare compromise in the Senate back in 2009. Since then, we haven't heard a whole lot of out of him.

True, Dean might appreciate a lower profile these days, but he's one of the main reasons we took back the House in 2006.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to derby378 (Reply #118)

Tue Mar 5, 2013, 01:04 PM

119. I have no love lost for Dean.

I remember the 2008 primaries where he always spoke up if there was a hint of racism against Obama (as he should have), but remained mute about the barrage of sexism against Hillary. After she had dropped out of the race and a group of women activists confronted him that summer and asked him about it, his response was that he hadn't been aware of it because he didn't watch TV that much. Bullshit!!!!

Same goes for Nancy Pelosi. She who, as Speaker of the House, should have remained neutral and who actively was twisting super delegate arms trying to convince them to switch allegiance from Hillary to Obama (even in states where she had won). I also remember her saying in public repeatedly in 2008 that it would be a terrible mistake if Obama picked Hillary as VP. Well, she too remained mute about the sexism until Hillary was safely out of the way. The hypocrite is now saying that Hillary would make a great president and that he should run in 2016.

The hell with both of them!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread