:smack:
Mea culpa. Thank you for correcting my error, septimus.
There isn’t any particular rhyme or reason to the order of the candidates.
Some names I’ve already bumped off my list:
-
Biden. He’s there on name recognition. It’s not clear just why he’d be running - and it ought to be clear this far out, if he’s got any desire to contest this. Also, he’s old.
-
Bernie. Too many Dems dislike him, quite reasonably IMHO. Did as well as he did last time because he owned the not-Hillary part of the Dem spectrum. Also, he has the seniority to block Coal Manchin from being the ranking Dem on the Senate Energy Committee, but he’s not going to, even while being a big-shot at the upcoming climate change town hall. Fucking show pony. Good riddance, Bernie.
-
Martin O’Malley. If Hillary hadn’t run in 2016, that would have been O’Malley’s big chance. But he couldn’t really distinguish himself from Hillary. Don’t want a younger Hillary in 2020.
-
Gavin Newsom. He just got elected governor. If he turns around and runs for President practically before having time to hang his own pictures on the walls in his new office, that’s a big fuck-you to California. And I can’t say I think highly of it either.
-
Eric Holder. Can you run for something else first? Let’s see what the voters of (whatever the hell state you’re from) think of you first, before running for President. Not crazy about Beto running for President before winning more than a House seat, but at least we know he can get 48% of the vote in Texas, and a Dem who can do that, can win any state where a Dem has a fighting chance.
Other for the win!
The only thing I even remember from his campaign was that he made gun control a centerpiece of his platform. Anyone who does this is not going to be competitive in the election. It’s not so much the single-issue gun voters, who are pretty much a lock for the Republicans, it’s all the people in the Midwest who may feel threatened by crime and feel strongly about self-defense.
Why? What will fundamentally change with any of these people between today and the start of the next campaign?
I agree that it’s too early to start campaigning right now. And certainly it’s true that once someone starts to campaign, you may see things that change your opinion of that person. But from now until the campaign “starts” (whenever that point is), it’s all the same–unless someone dies, or does something really crazy. So really there’s no difference between having a preference now and having a preference when the campaign “starts.” Nothing’s likely to happen that makes it too early to say now what one will eventually say in 18-24 months.
Whoever can beat Trump. So I pick Martin O’Malley.
I think Newsom will run and get the nom in 2024 or 2028. Especially if he passed meaningful legislation in California over the next 4 years and takes a meaningful stand against Trump.
Please stop saying Joe Biden! As a liberal I like him just fine, but he’s just way too old. This is not Malawi where a Hastings Kamuzu Banda can stay in office till the age of 96 before they manage to remove him. We need somebody at the top of their game.
I’m for Kamala Harris. I fell in love with her watching her grill Kavanaugh like a boss over Mueller and abortion rights. She is as badass as Corey Booker and I foresee her fighting like a demon for the liberal cause. We need another infusion of freshness and youth like Obama brought.
As a native Ohioan, let me explain. The name Brown has been political magic in Ohio since time immemorial, regardless of party. For some reason Ohioans just love voting for it. Anyone named Brown starts out with a maybe 5-point advantage. Why? It’s an Ohio thing you wouldn’t understand. It probably wouldn’t extend to the other 49 states, though.
The Plain Dealer had a big blurb the other day pointing out that if Sherrod Brown gets elected President, it’d be a Republican governor who appoints his replacement in the Senate. Depending on how close it looks like the Senate might be, that could be significant.
Since it’s waaaay too early to even begin to pick out who exactly is going to run much less front runners. You might as well pick anyone*. I’ll go a head and say Robert Mueller. Yes he has expressed no interest is probably ill suited for campaigning and is in fact a Republican (inspite of what Trump says) but the idea of him succeeding Trump is too delicious to pass up.
*except Clinton. I know the righties on the board keep trying to claim she’s coming back. But I know of no one who voted for her who wants her to run again. Give it up its not gonna happen.
I think the appeal is that he isn’t offensive to high school educated whites, who the democrats are losing in spades. He isn’t female or non-white, he has some blue collar cred and he isn’t seen as a boogeyman by the right. Plus he has name recognition.
If he were president he’d probably sign whatever legislation the dems could put in front of him.
Biden and Sanders do best against Trump in a potential 2020 matchup likely due to the reasons above.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/22/trump-2020-democrats-matchup-790890
This whole attitude of “only a white man can save us” stinks to high heaven.
As I said, this early poll should have been Pick 3. Don’t accuse me of misogyny for my Brown pick; my other two would have been Klobuchar and Harris. I hope we find a Governor to add to the list, though. More prestigious and experienced than a Senator.
She’s one of the three that I’m rooting for. However, and without trying to defend the misogynistic slug who was probably committing perjury again, the Gotcha question about an unnamed person at a law firm did not impress me. At least give the guy hints to jog his memory. Eye color? “Bigger than a breadbox”?
Senator Klobuchar is also a trained prosecutor and was able to reduce Kavanaugh to an obnoxious and blithering jerk.
Could this be related to my heroic ancestor, John Brown of Osawatomie? 
Although he was born and raised in the Northeast, made famous in Kansas and of course died as a martyr in Virginia, he spent much of his life in Ohio, e.g. as a stationmaster for the Underground Railroad.
You can’t reduce Kavanaugh to an obnoxious and blithering jerk, because that’s what he always is.
My bolding. This is really all you need. Biden and Sanders do better against Trump because they are the two most familiar names among those interested in running on the Democratic side. “Amy who?” “Kamala Harris? Wasn’t she on that TV show, you know the one I’m talking about…” “Sherrod Brown, oh yeah, that guy who used to be governor of California…” “Delaney? Sorry, never heard of him.” Sanders and Biden are much better known than these folks, and that name recognition, not policies, not race, not gender, is going to explain most of the gap this early in the race.
Of course not.
RESPECT.
I never said I agreed with it. Barack Obama was one of the most intelligent presidents we’ve ever had and Hillary Clinton would’ve been one of the most competent presidents we’ve ever had.
But the sad reality is that a lot of people aren’t comfortable voting for a non-white or woman because of identity politics. I’m not saying it is right, just stating reality.
Obama won twice, which is a good sign. But I think Obama’s win led to a resurgence of identity politics among resentful white people, and we have to acknowledge reality about what is happening right now.
Y’know, it’s pretty friggin’ offensive to assume those of us who like Biden are AFRAID OF THE WIMMINS AND THE NONWHITIES. Hell, in a perfect world I’d be going for Al Franken/Maxine Waters, but since I live in this one, I’d prefer to choose someone who has an actual chance.
(The “Jewish” attribute of a candidate is a bigger problem than the African American–obviously, because Obama. There’ll probably be a woman president before a member of my tribe gets in. Damn, y’all just can’t forgive us for the whole “killing Christ and owning all the banks” thing, can you? Plus I think something-something Bilderbergs? Is that also part of what we’re responsible for? I keep forgetting to update my portfolio.)
If you’re wondering why I and many others like Biden, I’ll let Pres. Obama speak for me. As I said, it depends on his health. If (as I hope) he remains equal to or better than Trump in mental and physical fitness, he’s a goer, with a younger and woman and/or person of color as VEEP. Anti-age bigotry is bigotry too–and with an increasing plurality of likely voters aging, that’s a voting bloc to be ignored at our peril.
Recommending Kamala Harris as being “just as badass as Corey [sic] Booker” is damning with faint praise. Booker’s as much a bland corporatist as any of the Clintonista pack, and he only wakes up when a camera’s on him. Though I do like when he is awake. I’m willing to see him continue in this vein if he can sustain it.
Harris is… a one-year Senator. Solid AG background but not ready for the big chair. She’s not gonna fly as top of the ticket. VP? Sure, why not. Though I’d prefer Tammy Duckworth.
Biden [healthy, always an important disclaimer]/Duckworth is a venerable pairup.
In the lists given in post #60 ranked in order of likelihood by the professional predictors, Kamala Harris appears at the top or second from the top. They must see something about her that the rest of you don’t.
You know, most of us could’ve predicted Hillary Clinton was going to be the 2016 nominee, doesn’t mean she was the right nominee.
And I say this as someone who voted for her in the primary, general, donated to her campaign, spent the better part of four months working more than full-time hours to get her elected, and really wanted her to be president.
2020 is probably not the right time to run a woman against the incumbent Republican. At least not at the top of the ticket.