For the sake of argument, I’m also assuming Warren stays out, because a) she’s unlikely to run according to her own words, and b) this discussion probably wouldn’t be very interesting since Democrats would probably flock to her if Clinton stayed out and she got in.
If there’s no obvious superstar, do the party faithful just say, “heck with it, it’s Biden’s turn?” Or maybe they go for someone who has proven they can win red state voters, like Brian Schweitzer or Jim Webb?
Vice President Biden is a possibility, but at 72 he is a bit old. Elizabeth Warren is popular with liberals but she is probably too liberal to be nominated.
So I would guess it is totally up in the air now.
Probably that fascist former-mayor of New York.
Warren is refreshingly outspoken and forthright in her opinions. I’d vote for her just based on that, and I think she could drum up a lot of support with younger voters and a lot of people who are sick and tired of the same old bullshit from politicians. But I think it’s too late for this election cycle. There must be others out there besides Clinton, and given the number of wackadoos on the right’s playlist, one of them may stand a chance. Julian Castro, maybe?
Giuliani is a Republican.
Let me redirect things a little. We know Biden is almost certainly in, and in the absence of Clinton has by far the most name recognition. Schweitzer and Webb are also in. O’Malley is probable. Julian Castro, like Warren, is out for 2016:
It’s cool to state preferences, but what I want to know is who would be most likely to emerge with the nomination should there be no Clinton and no liberal rising star, as seems probable so far? Does the party fall back on Biden or perhaps the most prominent liberal governor, O’Malley? Or perhaps someone who is totally different, like Schweitzer or Webb?
Well, Brian Schweitzer is still my top choice whether Clinton runs or not; he’s been openly cavalier about his willingness to run for POTUS, but I think most people assume Schweitzer is really just tossing his name out there in hopes of attaining the VP slot.
If Clinton stays out? Automatically, I think the front runner has to be Biden, right? He has the most name recognition after Clinton - not to mention the qualifications for the job - and he’ll probably throw his name into the ring no matter what HRC decides to do.
Also, even though nobody has mentioned him yet, I really don’t think that we can entirely write off my own governor Jerry Brown. Now, it’s possible that at his age he would rather just finish out his governorship & be done with politics altogether, but still, in light of his stellar track record in CA, he surely has the capabilities of a strong chief executive, and his experience might even siphon off a few GOP-leaning independents.
I’ve said it before - Terry McAuliffe!
Please no. He’s done a surprisingly good job as governor, IMO, but he is a terribly unappealing candidate.
He’s probably thinking of Bloomberg. Although he split from the Republican party, he’s not a democrat.
Bloomie isn’t well liked by republicans and libertarian types since he is kind of a nanny state guy (his failed initiative to forbid 20+ oz sodas in NYC, for instance) and also believes that global climate change is a fact and poses an immediate danger to all US coastal cities, oh and he endorsed Obama. OTOH democrats also hate him because he gives ridiculous favor to large corporate interests, absolutely despises unions and any type of labor regulations, oh and he’s the 13th-richest person in the world.
He’s sort of an everyone-can-hate-him lightening rod type.
What’s wrong with him?
Image, mostly. I’ve heard him described as insincere, smarmy, lacking in gravitas, among other things. And that was from democrats.
Virginia governors aren’t allowed to serve consecutive terms, so the position seems to attract politicians working their way up the ladder. Tim Kaine was touted as a possible candidate but is now a U.S. senator. George Allen was lining up a run for president until he had his “macaca” moment. The previous governor, Bob Mcdonnell was also thought to be considering a run for the nomination, but now he’s off to prison.
Do you know something I don’t about Schweitzer? Last I heard, he was pretty emphatic about not running (I believe his words were “Running for President would destroy my life”).
I’m not sure what category you’re trying to define, here. The candidate will, of necessity, either be a rising star, or an already-risen star. The already-risen stars are Clinton and Biden. If it’s neither of those, then it must be a rising star.
This could be John Kerry’s big chance.
Well consider the candidates running in 2008:
http://rightwingthinking.info/?p=194
Any thoughts on these?
Edwards’ political career is over, unless he changes parties. Democrats won’t tolerate that sort of behavior.
Kucinich’s only role in presidential elections is to pull the Overton window to the left. He’s never been electable to the Presidency, and never will be.
In 1988, Bill Clinton delivered the nomination speech. In 2004, Barack Obama delivered the keynote address. So based on a sample size of two, I predict that Julián Castro (who delivered the keynote address in 2012) will be the candidate.
Should Neil Kinnock start writing his acceptance speech just in case?
Castro would seem to be an unacceptable name–with people asking: Is he related to Fidel?