but after that my next 3 choices are Not Trump, Not Trump and Not Trump.

of WI, MI, and PA; I would add Amy Klobuchar to that list.

Klobuchar, Harris, or Warren. The other two, no thanks.

pencil though.

articulate, professional, positive, motivated, forceful, experienced, earned her stripes in California and in the Senate...

the prospective Democratic nominees except two

Harris, Warren, Gillibrand.

Gabbard does belong in this group and won't get my vote.

meant to say "Gabbard does NOT belong in this group and won't get my vote."

Harris is currently at the top of my list. Warren is under consideration as well... about middle of the pack. We'll see how she does on the stump.

Gillibrand is not out of consideration, but she's near the bottom of the list.

Gabbard? Nope. Nopey nope nope. I've not been a fan... Her homophobic comments were bad, but she apologized for them. But then those "both sides" bullshit arguments put the final nail in the coffin for me.

i'd like to see how Amy K. stacks up vs those you cited.

and even more during the general. I just hope whoever gets the nod survives without too many battle scars, or hurt voter feelings. We had enough of that last time.

Gillibrand's my senator, and I like her well enough, as do many others, but every time her name comes up around here, you can set your watch by how fast Al Franken is mentioned. Gun support and tobacco companies come up amongst those with longer memories.

Gabbard? Too confusing at this point. Buncha negatives, but I don't know what they really mean.

Harris and Warren? I could easily go with either of them, and would have tough time choosing in the primary. The rest of the crowd so far I don't think have what it takes. But, we'll see who shakes out soon enough.

1. Biden / Harris
2. Harris / Beto
3. Warren / Beto
4. Warren / Harris

I think any one of those could easily beat Chump.

Biden would sure be an entertaining as hell debate against Trump. Assuming Trump is even in office.

I'd love to see them debate Trump and Pence, assuming they're still in office!

My second is Beto/Biden. Third Warren/Beto. Yeah yeah, more than likely not realistic but one can dream.

I would throw Klobuchar in there as well - Klobuchar/Beto maybe?

before he ran for president. I vaguely remembered Obama from the 2004 Democratic convention, but knew nothing about him. I also didn't know anything about John Kerry or I forgot what I knew about him during his anti Vietnam War days. Going back even farther, Michael Dukakis or that peanut farmer from Georgia!

Looking back, Democrats often don't go with "household names" for their presidential nominees. I don't know why. Maybe because they have less baggage?

I don't think Beto adds enough balance to the ticket. I think Booker has a better chance to appeal to the urban centers of the firewall states.

Andrew Gillum assuming things work out with the ongoing investigation would also be a possibility. Maybe two years of DeSantis will convince Florida voters they made a mistake.

would also be good choices. I'm just not sure if Beto is ready yet, but then again, I felt that way about Obama and obviously I was wrong.

My list has recently changed but not at the top. Only announced candidates.

1) Gillibrand/Warren/Harris
4) Castro
5) Andrew Yang
6) Gabbard
7) Delaney
100) Ojeda

I would like to see one or two of these people enter. Sherrod Brown, Booker, Kerry, Holder, Klobuchar, Stacey Abrams.

Additionally, I want to see an executives enter.

Big field.

Last edited Tue Jan 22, 2019, 03:05 PM - Edit history (1)

Gabbard and Gillibrand won't win in the primaries.

I also like Adam Schiff, but don't know if he's interested.

She'll get money, but not the votes. (I hope)

Gabbard is flakey. She won't attract donors.

Gabbard?

Say a both sides “ Democrat “ is one of your favorites.

I can't stand Warren's demagoguery.

But they're all fine choices.

*That is, she can become a star, she can fill stadiums if they approach it correctly.

I for one will be sitting the primaries out.

I would vote for her if she was the Dem nominee, but I can't forget her for Al.

You alleged that there are too many strong candidates in the field previously this morning, and seem to be all over the place in the here and now.

Evolution of thought in two merely hours? Or simply another rationalization to justify the discrepancy?

Al voted the correct way in his senate votes too. Like I said, if she is the nominee, I will vote for her. But I won't support her before she is the nominee

Have you lost your mind?

Thank you. She is useful to have around though, if only to remind us of Gloria Steinem's test: "Women won't have achieved full equality until there are incompetent and corrupt women in positions of power."

in the House. I don't see her as a solid candidate. She's been all over the map in her career. I found her a little wishy-washy before Al Franken, but now I just don't trust her.

but I thinks that is because she has been running for president for quite awhile now. Meanwhile, maybe she is who she portrays herself to be, but still she is a very divisive candidate within the Democratic party. I don't think that will change and we don't need to relive the 2016 primary with Democrats eating their own.

Besides we have so many extraordinary choices this time, she just isn't toward the top of the list I'm afraid.

the same morning as Gillibrand.

I am glad we have some areas of agreement from time to time.

Gabbard would be an absolute disaster and get destroyed by Chump.

with such a large field. We potentially could see a few front runners winning states with 20% of the vote. That's one reason I'm behind Biden jumping in, he can easily win with 30% in every state and potentially sweep the first primaries.

I worry about the convention though, the person with the most delegates won't automatically be the nominee if two or three other candidates combine their forces with some kind of deal. That's what I think could be the real mess.

Followed by: Biden/Warren, Biden/Harris, Biden/Castro

Warren #1 and Harris #2 in that list.

Last edited Tue Jan 22, 2019, 07:39 PM - Edit history (1)

Yes Klobuchar.

edited to spell her name correctly.

I was just going with those who have announced so far.

but her responses to inquiries as to her intent are very indicative of yes.

She's extremely careful and considering her options.

With templates for her campaign logo. Seems like a strong indication.

It's early, though. We'll probably end up with a list of 20 or more to choose from. My criteria still boils down to who I think can beat Trump. It might end up being Joe Biden or someone who hasn't even hit the radar screen yet.