If the main Dem contenders for 2016 are Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren, who would you support?

[Cali_Democrat]

25 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Elizabeth Warren
	11 (44%)
	Hillary Clinton
	14 (56%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Jackpine Radical]

1. Warren.

No doubt about it.

[HERVEPA]

2. Warren, unless I thought Hillary had a much better chance of winning.

[jehop61]

3. I believe

We should give Sen. Warren time to get experience before passing judgement one way or another. She has much to learn before being ready to tackle the entire govt. She has much potential, but it's only been 4 weeks!

[msongs]

5. 4 years as senator is enuff to learn mechanics, the rest is vision, integrity, and leadership nt

[graham4anything]

7. excuse the interuption but-it takes 3 years to run for President these days

Hillary did not run during her first term as Senator.

[Scuba]

4. This one ...

[graham4anything]

6. It won't happen. Warren won't run if Hillary does.

Whomever is the nominee gets my support.

I would back Hillary because she can beat Jeb/Rubio or Jeb/Christie.
It takes a Clinton to defeat a Bush.

I am not positive Warren could beat Christie, and after what the Bush family did to Dukakis, who also was a big liberal from Mass. I do not think Warren would be able to easily defeat
Jeb Bush.

Warren or Hillary can beat all the other candidates with ease.(including Ryan,Rand,Santorium,
Huckabee,and whomever else there is.)

But it's Jeb/Rubio or Jeb/Christie that is the key and it takes Hillary Clinton to beat them.

(And again, Hillary would easily have beaten McCain in 2008.)

But it won't happen.
The two won't run against each other.

And I would rather in Jan.2017 have Hillary as President45, and Elizabeth Warren as head liberal in the senate pushing legislation through. That is a win/win.

IF for whatever reason Hillary did not run, Elizabeth Warren or Janet Napolitano would be my choice.

And as we now finally all agree age doesn't matter, maybe we can all dream that the VP would
be Jerry Brown. (for either candidate.) Wouldn't that be a fitting coda to his career?

[MrYikes]

8. Clinton.

[awoke_in_2003]

9. I voted Warren...

as we have had enough presidential dynasties

[Beacool]

10. You people enamored with Warren are dreaming if you think that she could win the presidency in 2016.

She barely managed to win a Senate seat in one of the bluest states. I think that she will be a great senator, but trying to sell her at the national level is just a left wing fantasy.

[Yavin4]

13. Funny. You could have posted the same thing in 2007. n/t

Just replace Warren with Obama.

[Beacool]

19. Obama had some legislative experience.

Warren had zip, zero, nada until she ran for the Senate.

[cali]

21. um, no. you certainly could not

Not only did Obama serve 8 years in the Illinois Senate, but he had previously run for Congress. Not to mention that he had a much higher profile, national backing, powerful Congressional support and is possessed of far superior political skills.

Very different.

[Rochester]

11. Hillary 2016 & 2020. Lizzie 2024 & 2028

[NYC Liberal]

12. Hillary, no doubt about it, with Warren as VP.

[Grown2Hate]

14. I vote Hillary, if only because I think Warren can do SO much more

good in the Senate (and it doesn't hurt that the Clintons know how to campaign like a MOTHER fucker). I think President O will be filling the role that President William Jefferson Clinton did on the campaign trail for him as well.

Regardless, the eventual nominee gets my vote over any asshole Rethug.

[davidpdx]

15. Voted Pass

I'm not even willing to consider someone until we know who's running. The start of the primary election is still 34 months away.

To those who have not voted, don't feel like you HAVE to make a choice now. That's the meme that's being pressed on DU.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

16. Warren aint running

She's made zero noise about doing so.

[RudynJack]

17. Elizabeth Warren

has served in public office less than two months. She's fantastic on one particular issue, but she's a cipher on the rest. The notion that she should run for President, or could win, is fantasy.

I would wager she has less than 20% name recognition nationally.

And Massachusetts politicians haven't had a resounding record in presidential races since 1960. GHW Bush was born there, but ran from Texas. Before that, John Quincy Adams was the last Massachusetts President.

People love Warren because they can project anything they want on her - she doesn't have a record, she hasn't had to cast the tough votes.

I love Warren. I want her to have a very long successful career in the Senate. Beyond that? Let's see what she does over the next 12 years or so.

[leftynyc]

18. Hillary

Sen Warren is wonderful but I believe Hillary has a much better chance of winning independents.

[Arkana]

20. I'd support Warren with a very heavy heart.

I don't think she'll run, but I'd support her if she did.