that she supported while being CA AG.

Sessions did, too.

...as a US Senate candidate.

This year, Jane Raybould (D-NE) and Beto O'Rourke (D-TX) each faced Republicans first elected to the US Senate in 2012. Each Democrat lost, while getting 5% points more than Hillary Clinton got in their states 2016.

O'Rourke's result wasn't special.

In 2012, Deb Fischer won her seat in Nebraska by over 15 points, 57.8% to 42.2%. In 2018, she won by over 20 points, 58.75% to 38.3%. Jane Raybould received 4 points less than Bob Kerrey in 2012. (42% vs 38%). So, with the incumbency, Fischer improved by almost 5 points overall.

In 2012, Ted Cruz won his seat by 16 points, 56% to 40%.
In 2018, Ted Cruz won his seat by 2.6%, 50.9% to 48.3%, an improvement of 13.4%
Despite the incumbency, Cruz lost over 13 points off of his win.

O'Rourke raised huge funds that were all from small donors and forced the national Republican party to divert funds from other races to save Cruz, possibly helping Tester to win in Montana and Sinema in Arizona. Additionally, Democrats made good pickups in local races in Texas - all those judgeships in Houston made national news, plus Democrats made gains in both legislative houses in Texas. The Nebraska race was never competitive, so the national Republicans did not need to divert money to the state to help her out.

His improvement was by 8%, not 13%. The gap stat is a derivative sum, not an objective measure of support. He did good, but we don't have to rubberize the numbers to recognize his talent.

he improved 8% over the previous Democrat in the race, but Cruz losing 5% maybe doesn't happen with another candidate?

He also spent a lot of money on GOTV that is at least partly credited with helping Dems in other state races there as well.

Someone is afraid of Beto

Anyway, if people are charged up by the guy, he's a leader. That's what it takes to govern, not a stretch in Congress (which he's also done, by the by)

First, I don't see how a Senate election in Nebraska (where about 1/10 of the Texas votes were cast) is relevant to the Texas results, but whatever:

O'Rourke lost 4,260,553 to 4,045,632; Clinton lost 4,685,047 to 3,877,868 (turnout this year was almost as high as the PRESIDENTIAL turnout, which is historically very high)

For what it's worth, Raybould lost 403,151 to 269,917; Clinton lost 498,961 to 284,498

During the last Senate election in Texas (2014) Cornyn won 2,855,068 to 1,594,252. O'Rourke got almost as many votes this year by himself than ALL candidates combined got in the last Texas Senate election.

Seems you're stretching quite a bit to throw shade on O'Rourke's remarkable campaign this year.

That matters. He has that "it" factor that can MAKE a President.

Not in order

O'Rourke
Biden
Klobuchar
Brown
Gillibrand

I don't think the rest of them have a serious chance to win the nomination.

I desperately hope we don't nominate Amy Klobuchar or Kirsten Gillibrand.

Please note: I'm not using the word "concern" sarcastically (which may be a first in DU ).

I guess it goes without saying.

As for Klobuchar, she is supporting a bill with Roy Blunt that would link the foreign aid we give to other countries to their willingness to open up to American adoptions. I think that is a terrible idea.

I've asked questions about Gillibrand in the past. At this point, the reason I quit asking about her was that she's not a terribly dynamic or passionate advocate for her views. She's the most reliably anti-Trump voter in the Senate, so insinuations that she's close to Roy Blunt politically aren't terribly substantive. I don't think most people will be bothered by the idea that a candidate knows how to work across party lines.

We need a nominee who's more than just ideologically consistent and personally ambitious, however. We need a leader who inspires people and turns out crowds and generates passion among average voters. That's why Beto jumped to the top of this (entirely subjective and meaningless) top ten list. His record for drawing small donations is impressive, he draws commitment from people. I'm not sold on him yet, but he continues to impress me.

not Kirsten Gillibrand. And I am not insinuating that she is close to Blunt politically. I am saying that I am angered by the legislation she is proposing and it has cost her any chance of ever getting my vote.

I agree that Beto is impressive and he has a great shot of winning the nomination. But I think Tom Steyer will surprise a lot of people.

but if she does, I'm pretty sure you'll vote for her.

I'll keep an eyeball out for Steyer. Thanks for the head's up

I meant that I would never support her in a Democratic primary.

I didn't say that her position would cost her the nomination. I said it had cost her my vote.

Having great ideas is important. But Steyer will have to deal with the impression that he's trying to buy his way into the nomination. If we lacked real leadership and ideas in the party, that sort of personal commit would be impressive. I think we got a deep enough bench this time around that we don't need the hail Mary.

Tom Steyer has a great record of environmental advocacy and has led the charge to impeach Donald Trump. Those two things put him way up on my list.

In that order

... Dr. Jones

Hilary Clinton and Rudy Guliani were at the top of the polls to secure their party's nominations in 08.

How did that work out?

Joementum!

... Basing rankings on a straw poll, I see.

Joe is necessary to cleanup our international image..

Perhaps Sherrod Brown for sec of labor
Warren for Treasury
Harris for atty general..

Brown would be the only scary one to nominate since Ohio is a sketchy place these days..

I wouldn't want to rid the Senate of Brown, Warren and Harris with the likelihood of Republican replacements for Warren and Brown. Obama played that card with Kansas governor Sibelius in 2009 with disastrous results for Kansas when she left to join his Cabinet.

It was the same for him--a brief few months in the national limelight, which soon got extinguished. He still went on to do great things, but he never sought elective public office again.