So. Everyone is talking about the potential Republican nominees, and nobody seems to be talking about the potential Democratic nominees. Although Hillary would most likely win the Democratic nomination if she decides to run, there's a chance she doesn't run. So, BESIDES HILLARY, who would you guys like to see be the Democratic candidate?
One of the problems for Dems is that they have so few candidates besides Hillary. Part of this is because they have so few viable governors (In 2010, the GOP picked up a lot of governorships)
No, thank goodness! Two terms only here. We will be lucky to survive The Kenyan until we get rid of him and his band of crooks and thieves!
With her consumer protection history, she has strong Progressive (protect the less fortunate from the elite) credentials. Do you say, Liberal because someone else did? Moi No
The media constantly tells us who might be a Republican candidate in 2016. But we never hear who might be a Democrat candidate. Interesting.
It's a very good question. Hillary might not run after all. She has the stink of Benghazi all over her, and (sadly, and I have said this before) she lacks the youth and attractiveness to be a viable rock-star candidate. Biden doesn't stand a chance because he's a bone-head and he possesses ZERO rock-star qualities. As WallStreetVixen muses, Barack Obama himself might wish to repeal the 22nd Amendment with his pen and his phone, and there is a certain segment of our society who just might support such a thing. But he has lost popularity points along the way, and there will be little support for Obama appointing himself Potentate For Life. I do believe that when the dew officially falls off the Hillary rose, the Democrats will very likely begin to polish and groom New York Governor Andrew Cuomo as their next rock star candidate. That is my prediction.
It's possible, maybe that's one reason he is trying to distance himself from NYC's Mayor, Comrade De Blasio. Martin O'Malley may want to give it a shot too. He has screwed MD folks out of so much money that the Democrats may see him as the most accomplished candidate to date. MD btw has a "Rain Tax" thanks to him.
Liberals/Progressives/Socialists/Marxists are pretty much all the same to me! We don't need a "Robin Hood," Instead we need jobs and a truly stimulated economy that will make people self-sufficient.
Study up. Liberals are about social programs for the poor on the backs of the middle. Progressives are about the elite paying their fair share, not an equal membership fee. Besides Elizabeth Warren, Jerry Brown is the only other major Democrat who maintains the qualities of a Progressive. We placed an extra tax on the California uber wealthy and voila - a manageable budget. The Liberals wanted Brown to reinstate and add social programs. Brown being more fiscally conservative opted for a rainy day fund. The Libertarians are also pushing a Progressive agenda in their manner. You can identify a Progressive by who the media universally hates, like Ron & Rand Paul. The rich fear their victory. The rich run the media. Remember how they treated Dennis Kucinich. RepubloCrats are anti Progressive = Plutocracy. Questions? Moi No
It will very probably be Hillary, I don't think any of the other women are likely to run (maybe Warren? [if Hillary went at it with policies Warren thought were bad) if Hillary doesn't. Honestly I feel like democrats want to make history again and break that glass ceiling. If Hillary doesn't run then maybe Warren (people have mentioned Gillibrand- I think she could be a presidential candidate one day but I doubt it for 2016- she lacks name recognition out of NY it seems) but I'm really not sure whether she would/could win, depends how stupid the Republican candidate is. Perhaps Klobuchar if Hillary doesn't run. I don't think Biden would get the nomination (even if Hillary doesn't win) Maybe Cuomo? OMalley? Warner? I think because of the fact that we have universal healthcare now, which the democrats have wanted since forever, they are much more willing to come together as a party behind Hillary and don't want another primary fight to the death like in 2008. Whereas some competent Republican needs to go out and beat people in a primary so the Republican party can get behind them (beating Bachmann and Santorom doesn't count they need to beat some good people)
Only in the Republican Manifesto does a candidate have to be a governor before he can be a president.
Ha ha ha ha ha!! Quite possibly the funniest thing I have witnessed on the internet today. Phoebe Bump darling, Care to relate for us all the particulars of the trials and tribulations that you have personally suffered under GW Bush? Did he walk in and club a small family of baby seals to death in your front yard perhaps? Drill for oil right thru your mom's bedroom floor? Did GW Bush foment an illegal war for petroleum profits at the expense of your cell phone coverage or your television service, precious darling? George Bush, really. That tired old chestnut?? Don't you have anything else in your toolkit? Call birddog a RACIST, that'll make everything all better!! - - - Updated - - - I just cracked myself up. I kill me, I swear.
Why personally? Isn't it enough that he tanked this country on a macro basis? But to answer your question, Bush did not personally take a dump on my personal front porch. Somehow, he just left the stink.
Uh, no? Actually it's reality. Statistically, governors are much more likely to be elected prez. Therefore, having a bunch of Governorships across the country will give you a better crop of candidates. Just something the Dems need to work on (gaining more Governor seats)
Elizabeth Warren would be my first choice for principles, but she's far too liberal to win. I would think Maria Cantwell would be a better option for moderation and with less baggage than Hillary.
