General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFor the hell of it, let's speculate 2016
We'll assume Obama wins this year, and that Biden does not run to follow him.
Hillary will probably be near the top of many lists, with the standard DU favs like Kucinich, Sanders, and Grayson added.
Let's assume those names, and stir the pot a bit. Here's my top five (in no particular order):
Deval Patrick - Twice Governor of Massachusetts
http://senate.ontheissues.org/Deval_Patrick.htm
Criticism - Harvard Law Grad raised by a single mom. His personal story may be too reminiscent of Obama's for 2016, but maybe not
Sherrod Brown - Senior Senator from Ohio
http://senate.ontheissues.org/Senate/Sherrod_Brown.htm
Criticism - The voice of the people...who smoked too much.
Barbara Boxer - Junior Senator from California
http://senate.ontheissues.org/Senate/Barbara_Boxer.htm
Criticism - Would really piss off the Republicans. Wait....nvm
Elizabeth Warren - Potential Junior Senator from Massachusetts
http://senate.ontheissues.org/Senate/Elizabeth_Warren.htm
Criticism - Let's see how well she does against Brown.
(I borrowed Bernie Sanders' map!)
"The Unknown Grassroots Candidate" - House Rep? Administration hero? Super Mayor? A star about to shine?
Criticism - This person is a currently a wish, and probably doesn't exist. Then again, who would have that that Obama would rise so quickly?
So ok...Who makes your list?
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)I believe she's said she's leaving government employment at the end of this year, hasn't she?
Sherrod Brown and Elizabeth Warren both are huge favorites of mine, but keep in mind that in 2004 people had just barely heard of Barack Obama, and in 1988 William Clinton was a little-known governor of a small, low-profile southern state.
Republicans tend to have people who are groomed for years to run for President. Not the Democrats.
demwing
(16,916 posts)Hillary will still be at the top of many lists here at DU. There are still occasional threads speculating that Obama will swap her and Biden.
And I did keep in mind the unknown factor, which is why I had an "Unknown Candidate"
Other than Warren and Sherrod, who's your dark horse?
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)I know speculating about elections more than one cycle down the road is a favorite past time here, but I keep on pointing out how complete unknowns keep on popping up out of the woodwork for the Democrats, making it quite pointless.
monmouth
(21,078 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)He's a corporatist who probably makes his daddy Mario cry.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)right here on DU. Clearly he is someone to consider seriously. Cuomo's a Third Way Dem who's liberal on social issues. No thank you. Now his dad . . .
monmouth
(21,078 posts)demwing
(16,916 posts)who has called for the complete transformation of Social Security, using phrases such as "Honor our commitment to seniors" balanced against "enable low-income Americans to save for their own retirement."
I don't trust the guy,
dmallind
(10,437 posts)wandy
(3,539 posts)Allen would be a "hard sell', that's a given. Still consider that he is stright up. You can almost believe that he is not just tossing a line of bullshit.
That's what would make him a "hard sell".
That's what would make him a good choice.
michreject
(4,378 posts)He has never won any state wide election.
I believe that the nominee will either come from the ranks of a Governor or Senator.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)Life Long Dem
(8,582 posts)Romney would have two terms.
Bake
(21,977 posts)But then, some people thought Obama was a nobody too, back in the day.
Bake
demwing
(16,916 posts)where's your additions? Who are your candidates? I guarantee you the Republicans are thinking about 2016. Are we?
Bake
(21,977 posts)Beyond that, I'd look for a governor, but I don't see anybody at this point (other than perhaps Deval Patrick). Elizabeth Warren appears to be a fighter, but she's never been elected to anything, so let's see how she does against Brown. Biden's really too old (for that matter, so is HRC). Sherrod Brown is a possibility.
So right now, I got nothin'. But you are correct, we'd best start looking for some potential candidates!
Bake
AsahinaKimi
(20,776 posts)But Elizabeth Warren has great potential as a leader.
** Edited to add Alan Grayson as another choice!
demwing
(16,916 posts)but I'd really love to see Boxer make a run for it...
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)political office.
I hate to be snarky, but it's beginning to be irritating, the posters who don't seem to realize that you don't start out in politics by running for the most difficult election in the world. It's so hard to run for President that even hard nosed, extremely experienced politicians have been unable to hold up under the pressure or win or even do well. Look at Rick Perry, a governor who had never lost any election before, and had won more than a few...sunk horribly. Biden. Hillary. Dole. McCain. Kerry. Kemp. And on and on.
Warren is extremely inexperienced, and may not win her first toe-dip into campaigns, altho it's close. There is no way she can run for President any time soon.
Couple that with the fact that it's extremely difficult for a Congress person to win President, because of all the recorded votes they've made, or not made.
Obama was very experienced, having run and won several elections on a statewide level and national-state level. Plus, he's just a natural, and is unique.
Warren has several more elections to go before she's as experienced as Obama was, when he won. And he was relatively inexperienced as a campaigner running for President.
She might be considered as VP, tho.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)is part of the appeal.
Obama's people will be looking for work after his last election is over.
I'm still all in for Elizabeth Warren. This is the same path Hillary Clinton took. I am fairly sure it can be done and that she is the woman to do it.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)She was around 60 years old, full of life experiences, comfortable debating and discussing politics on a global scale, and experienced at dealing with reporters and politicians and world leaders. And don't forget: she lost to someone with more campaign experience.
If you had a Fortune 500 company and were looking for a new CEO, would you hire your cousin Martha, who is trying to set up a gift shop in your city, and that's the extent of her experience with business? Even though you like the way Martha thinks (she thinks like you), and Martha is smart, you'd recognize that Martha isn't experienced at dealing with thousands of locations across the world, dealing with treaties and trade agreements with other countries, dealing with the accountants working on and balancing the books of a billionaire corporation, dealing with all the local state and national and other countries' laws affecting the corporation. No, you wouldn't hire Martha for that position. But you might let her try to handle a department at the corporation, as long as there is oversight of her.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)but if you want to swap "cousin" for "friend's wife" in that analogy it will fit one of these women very well.
Mrs. Warren was born in '49, so in '16 she will be 67. So much for your "full of life experiences" argument.
I'll agree that Mrs. Warren has mostly economic experience and far less foreign relations experience than Mrs. Clinton but you will need to admit that Mrs. Warren has far more experience dealing with the economy than Mrs. Clinton.
Once she has a couple of years in the Senate she will be fine.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Don't know why people can't see that.
Oh, well. You'll see. It...will...not...happen.
This is not a senate position. It's the most difficult office in the world to campaign for and to win.
No one will offer her the run in the primary, and even if she'd make it happen herself (which is unlikely), she wouldn't win a primary. No one will offer her the run in the primary, though. She's green. She's not a politician. Yet. And it takes more than one campaign to be ready to run for the Presidency.
You'll see.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)so I am speculating, not predicting.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)demwing
(16,916 posts)Listen, do you think politicians are the only political animals that live?
Do you not think it take a political sense to work your way up to become a Law Professor at Harvard?
Do you think a brilliant academic is unable to debate?
Ultimately (and I said something similar about Gillibrand down-thread) maybe we are stuck in a rut, and we have to change the way we understand what it is that makes a great leader.
This desire to only elect politicians might be causing us to miss out on the the realization of the promise of the American experiment - a government that is REALLY made up and powered by ordinary citizens. Maybe we shouldn't resist some fundamental challenges to our perceptions, because as I look around at the state of our union, I have to believe that our perceptions are driven by some very powerful misconceptions.
If the system as it is works so damned well, then why does it also work so damned poorly?
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Life Long Dem
(8,582 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)annabanana
(52,791 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)I hear Cuomo's name a lot.
Hillary is a strong possibility, IF she decides to run.
boxman15
(1,033 posts)He is a solid Democrat, a successful governor, and will be able to win over swing voters in a similar way that Obama did in 2008, in my opinion.
PragmaticLiberal
(904 posts)but I'm fairly confident that he WILL be the nominee.
boxman15
(1,033 posts)I consider him the favorite. He just has presidential material, in my opinion, and would do a great job winning over voters. That's not to say others won't, it's just that I think he's the strongest possible candidate for 2016 as of now.
Cuomo, once his stances are out in the open, won't be able to energize liberals enough to vote for him in the primaries.
Hillary could win it, but I don't think she'll want to run. Plus, I think swing voters are sick of her (Though I think she'd make a great president)
With Warren, let's see if she even wins her Senate seat before we start speculating about her.
Almost everyone else that DU is speculating about, in my opinion, are just pipe dreams. We'll see, though. We have an election in a few months to worry about first.
demwing
(16,916 posts)he's a 3rd Way "New Dem," wants to change the basic structure of Social Security.
AJTheMan
(288 posts)I love Democratic primaries.
GarroHorus
(1,055 posts)She could actually win a national election.
RandySF
(59,158 posts)It's very rare for parties to get three terms. The Republicans will probably get their shit together and keep the crazies out of serious contention. Their own top tier (Jeb!, Pawlnety, Sandoval, etc) will be running and people, for whatever reason, will want a change.
demwing
(16,916 posts)and whether Hillary runs
boxman15
(1,033 posts)then I think it's very possible we could win in 2016 if we get the right candidate on the ticket (for me, that's Martin O'Malley). It'll be very tough, no doubt (the only party to win 3 presidential elections in a row since FDR-Truman was the GOP with Reagan-Bush Sr.), but it's still possible.
GarroHorus
(1,055 posts)She will be ripe for a national election in 2016.
On the Road
(20,783 posts)my choice would be Howard Dean again.
Zen Democrat
(5,901 posts)Chisox08
(1,898 posts)TheKentuckian
(25,029 posts)What they stand for and when do they go to the firewall is what I'm concerned about and I'll be looking for the who to fit that.
Too damn many are too fixated on personality and packaging and too disinterested in content.
Cult of personality loyalist are killing the party.
demwing
(16,916 posts)so you could see the WHY behind the WHO.
So which pols do you think best represent the policies and "content" that you find important?
sadbear
(4,340 posts)Is he not progressive enough?
demwing
(16,916 posts)That's only fair...
Without judgement, here's his VoteMatch map:
and a record of where he's come down of various positions:
http://senate.ontheissues.org/Brian_Schweitzer.htm
Just from a cursory glance, I see he's a center left Dem, big on Gun rights, favors domestic partnerships over marriage equality.
That's understandable for a Dem in Montana, but is it where we'd like to see the country go?
sadbear
(4,340 posts)I was just surprised to not see his name and wanted to know why no one mentioned him yet. I mean, there are our dream candidates and then there are the candidate who could actually win. Maybe that person is O'Malley. (We'll talk about Elizabeth Warren after November.)
demwing
(16,916 posts)Maybe you could describe that candidate?
GarroHorus
(1,055 posts)Kirsten Gillibrand
demwing
(16,916 posts)And seems so bright and energetic.
But there's something about her demeanor that I don't associate with being the President.
It's not gender based. Hillary doesn't hit me that way, nor even a non politician like our first lady. I could see either sitting across a table from any world leader and representing our country in the greatest light.
But not Gillibrand. I think Gillibrand just doesn't have sufficient gravitas
Maybe I'm just fucking jaded. Maybe I have a faulty perception of what it takes to lead, and I need to work on changing that bit about myself. Maybe Gillibrand is exactly what this country needs.
sadbear
(4,340 posts)I suspect a Democratic candidate who could win could be only slightly more liberal than President Obama. But a lot could happen between now and 2016. I'm only speculating on 2016 as if the election were being held tomorrow.
Godhumor
(6,437 posts)If he does not, then Hillary. If she does not, then I will wait and see who steps up.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)I don't know a lot about him to be sure, but a bit of cursory reading about him looks promising. He is very well liked by the people that know him(unlike Robme) and has had a very good political career. He has youthful looks, but was born in 1952, and is Governor of a state that goes red for presidential elections. So with out further ado I present: Gov. John Lynch (NH).
Probably be best to not recruit him until in late 2014 though in order to avoid candidate fatigue, but then on the other hand, people seem to like him more the better they know him.
Pab Sungenis
(9,612 posts)Cory Booker is going to top a lot of people's lists. Although he's a little too corporatist for me and somehow I doubt we'll see two African Americans in a row. It's probably the right time for a woman.
sadbear
(4,340 posts)At least the last time I checked. Maybe enough time has pasted. Maybe not.
Greggers
(5 posts)1. Elizabeth Warren: she has a great message
2. Alan Grayson: he speaks the truth about what the Rethuglicans want
3. Al Frankin: fearless progressive warrior
4. Debbie Wasserman Schultz: she's hot
5. Jesse Jackson Jr: great progressive and fighter of racism. Plus you know how much the racist Rethuglicans would hate to have another African-American as president.
Boxcar Willie
(75 posts)BlueIris
(29,135 posts)we'll nominate the same guy we're nominating this time around.