You noted that Hillary Clinton’s opponent was endorsed overwhelmingly by MoveOn.org and lost.
Could it be that Bernie doesn’t need MoveOn to win in 2020?

seem to have moved on to someone else.

That being said if you believe going from 78% to 13% in a poll is a good thing there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion.

I just want to know

I merely cited an article.

Going from seventy eight percent to thirteen percent is a good thing? Run with that.

O'Malley and "none of the above" made up the remainder. MoveOn is a large and important progressive grassroots organization and their support enabled Bernie to really take off at the beginning of 2016. If he's not overwhelmingly ahead again, it's not a good sign for him.

https://front.moveon.org/sanders-endorsement-release/

not sure what you mean?

That was a terrible result for Bernie. Move On should be his base.

those groups are more likely to support someone like Kamala Harris and Beto Orourke so this actually shows how strong Beto could be as a candidate.

I think Beto, and Joe are young but either one would be a fantastic VP.

his actual voting record in Congress is about in the middle of the Democratic caucus despite being in a solid blue district. My concern is that he's not progressive enough to win the primaries.

Sanders was more progressive than Clinton. A lot of good it did him. Personality plays a large part in primaries. In the general election its partisanship or negative partisanship.

so I think Kennedy is unlikely to run against him. but he might still "test the waters" early on.

Especially considering if you look at his policies he is really more of a moderate and very pro on fossil fuels.
Also very in favor of working with republicans.


That is a deal breaker for me as that was one of my very few criticisms of PBO was him constantly going back to republicans, to the point of looking foolish and weak and self-destructive.

Sorry, we need a lot more backbone going forward, the days of capitulating to republicans is long past.
Have we learned nothing over the last several years with republicans shitting on us and what is now happening in WI, MI and FL and them poisoning the well before they leave town??

Ceteris paribus, most folks will choose the cleanest form of energy, but some times the cleanest form of energy is not practical.

“He’s very pro fossil fuels” is a baseless argument, like the rest of the critiques offered in the post. “no backbone” etc. total nonsense.

Carpe diem! I remember when Chris Matthews endorsed Barack Obama's run for the presidency and said he needed to seize the moment and not wile away in the Senate, getting old and gray.


I might change my mind but right now I like what I see.

Great strides in Texas but we’re not there yet as far as Dems winning statewide races.

I’m a heavy lean toward O’Rourke at the moment. But honestly I can’t see myself having a big problem with any of the DEMOCRATS who are mulling runs. There’s things I admire in all of them, from Corey Booker to Amy Klobuchar and everyone in between. There’s been no Democrat that has been mentioned that I’ve thought to myself “Ugh I hope they don’t run.”

Rude. You made a lot of assumptions without asking any questions as to why I feel that way.

My preferred candidate is Kamala Harris, who was not in the top 5 of that list. Not sure why but don’t really care that much either.
And I actually advocated for O’Rourke as a VP for her until I took a closer look at his voting record and the fact he violated his own pledge to not take campaign donations from fossil fuel executives without so much as an explanation or an apology.

Climate change is very real and O’Rourke has a voting record in which is has voted against every option to limit or modernize our use of fossil fuels.

We can no longer afford the “we can have it all” mentality. We have to invest in R&D as well as implementing real solutions we have today to address problems that are only getting harder to solve with each passing day.

The POTUS is not a popularity contest. We need a serious, educated, strong-willed person that is willing to solve very real problems, today. I just don’t happen to think that person is O’Rourke.

I worked on his campaign from Jun-Nov and read his positions, none of which place him in the pro-fossil fuel column.

(specific policies and bills, rather than indirect, after-this-therefore-because-of-this allegations)

He violated his own pledge to not accept campaign donations from oil and gas executives. He receives more money from the fossil fuel industry than any Democrat:
https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?ind=E01++

Joined republicans to vote against the HR 702 Oil Exports Ban
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2015/roll549.xml

In 2016 he voted against an admendment to ban offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico
http://scorecard.lcv.org/roll-call-vote/2016-447-offshore-drilling-eastern-gulf-mexico

Not saying he is a horrible person but we can ill afford to continue to operate under the fantasy that we can keep doing what we are doing and still avoid the coming catastrophe of climate change. “All of the above” is no longer realistic. We need someone that has the backbone to make hard decisions because these problems are getting harder and more expensive to fix with each passing day.

A short stint in the House and almost winning a Senate race but not winning a Senate race just doesn’t give him the profile IMHO.

Ron Paul did great in these sorts of polls.

As for polls in general at this stage, it's all about name recognition.

a few things that could make the difference would be that he is isn't so good when it comes to actually discussing policy. Clinton and Obama were policy wonks and that is important among democrats unlike with the GOP .

someone like Kamala Harris or someone else who may not be your traditional candidate may be able to win over many voters in the way Hillary Clinton did. by not traditional candidate I do mostly mean female candidates where they have to deal with different expectations but could still bring a different perspective .

I know there has been a lot of discussion about Pelosi as Speaker. And Beto as President.

O'Rourke may prove to be more than a bright, shiny thing in the future, but at this point, that's all he is.