I think shd will do great with Independents and can put states in play thatwe lost last time.

I know he's said otherwise, but I think he would bring a lot to any future administration, as he is doing now.

After the mid terms , although I know it is a different electorate , I have some pause...


President Obama needs to get his popularity into the mid to high forties or he will be a major drag on the ticket.

single digit popularity of Congress.

It is because the most of the inane Democrats are running away from his accomplishments the last 6 years, and they are getting exactly what they deserve. Obama has been on his own for most of his term, which makes it even more remarkable what he has been able to get through in spite of them.

Obama is unpopular because the MSM has told you he is. Howard Dean was not a stable person, because the MSM told you he wasn't. Until more Americans pull their heads out of their asses, and do some critical thinking, things are not going to change

Seriously, I wish it wasn't true. But it is.

President Obama has an approval rating of about 40%.

The Democratic Party has a rating of about 36%. http://www.gallup.com/poll/179345/democratic-party-favorable-rating-falls-record-low.aspx

While the Republicans in the same poll have an approval rating of 46%. What that means is that President Obama's approval ratings are slightly better than the party as a whole, but worse than the Republicans.

53% want the Republicans in Congress to set the agenda. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025805067

While 57% want Congressional action on Immigration, only 20% support the President using executive action. By this time next week, we'll be remembering fondly the good old days when President Obama had approval ratings in the 40's. By this time next year, every candidate Democrat or Republican is going to be running against Obama, which will cause a small war within our party, and making us much weaker going into the Primaries.

If you don't like the polls, post your own. Show me where I'm wrong, but right now, the Republicans are kicking our asses across the board, and denial isn't helping matters. Before you can fix it, you have to know what is broken. Before you can ask the people to vote for you, you have to know what they care about, and what they think.

Obama won't compromise or talk with the republicans, plus constant one sided negative reporting, has an influence which skews things

You indicated the polls say people want immigration reform, and no executive action, yet when the house tried to push their own plan their own party would not accept it.

I am saying there is a major public disconnect to a large extent because of shoddy reportin on on the airwaves

People don't read anymore and prefer to be spoon fed

However, ignoring those polls and the public opinion on the issues is death to political candidates.

People have put me on ignore because I have said one positive thing about Reagan. He could communicate his message to the people and use public opinion as a cudgel to wave at Congress. President Obama has not enjoyed nearly the success that Reagan did with that talent. Congress said no way to the Tax cuts that Reagan wanted. Reagan went to the people and sold them on his ideas. The People went to Congress. I am not saying the tax cuts were a great idea. I am saying they were sold well.

I believe there is truth in the axiom that you learn more from a defeat than you do a victory. The idea of common sense tax structure was defeated to this day by one old man in 1981. Nobody has been able to sell the alternative view to the masses. Think about that. Think about that defeat, and why we haven't learned from it yet.

With the same funding Warren would win, hands down.

Hillary has name recognition and can brag about her resume but most people don't vote on resume, they just use it to defend their selection when there's nothing else to use.

Hillary just turns off a lot of people, including many in her own party. Her running will mobilize the opposition, I'm afraid.

I think Sanders might come off as too much an outsider and I think he may be a little less effective as a speaker, but I would love a Sanders presidency, too.

BTW, by "success" I presume you mean chances of winning, not success in moving progressive legislation.

Hillary would not do a lot of that.

can have a chance is if he runs as a Democrat, which I think he will.

Then the question comes who can present the better case.

Given the fact that none of the choices in your poll have even declared their candidacy, the poll numbers make it clear that Hillary Clinton has a very strong edge at this point. Warren probably isn't going to run, but will support Clinton's candidacy. Bernie Sanders is probably the best choice on political grounds, but will not fare well in the primaries, even if he switches parties to become a Democrat.

Biden will support Hillary Clinton enthusiastically, and I doubt that he will even run.

The rest of your list, I think, hasn't a prayer.

Bernie in the primaries if he runs as a Democrat. He speaks very directly to the issues, and never talks down to people. That does not mean Hillary is not the favorite if she decides to run, but it means she will need to present a populist message and speak directly to the issues. A few weeks back Hillary was doing interviews criticizing the Obama administration. A bad move in my opinion. She should focus in criticizing republican policy, unless of course she wants to divide the party. The republicans in general do one thing that the Democrats don't, they very rarely criticize a fellow republican.

Frankly, if I were Hillary I would make the Supreme Court as a campaign issue, along with such decisions as citizens united, the voting rights act, and a women's right to choose, etc.

In the midterms Grimes lost the election against McConnell, but it wasn't because the Clinton's helped her, or she ignored Obama, it was because she was a Democrat in a very red state, that was afraid their coal jobs would be lost. In other words, the odds were always against her, which is why some argued, and I believe rightly after consideration, that she should have stood her ground, not only said she supported Obama, but all the things that had been accomplished. If one has an uphill battle, or even a lost battle, you should go out with dignity and self-respect.

There is no doubt where the republicans stand, and there should be no doubt where the Democrats stand.

will do slightly better than Dennis Kucinich in the primaries, assuming he runs as a Democrat. Since the primaries here in Minnesota are quite late in the year, I doubt he will appear on our ballot. If he does, I will vote for him, but I expect that he will have withdrawn before our primary ballot is set.

Exactly how Hillary Clinton campaigns is still up in the air, I think. I think, however, that she will have strong endorsements by everyone who people are talking about as possible candidates, including Bernie Sanders. She'll also be strongly endorsed by President Obama, I'm sure.

It's still very early, so I'm not certain how this will all go, but I find it very difficult to envision anyone but Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee. I just don't see a path to the actual nomination for any of the names being mentioned. One person I'm almost certain won't run is Elizabeth Warren. She's a realist about her chances, I'm sure, and I think that she'll be championing Hillary throughout the race.

One last thing about Warren: If by some weird chance she got the nomination, many of the people who are trying to build up support for her will be criticizing her background by election day. Her years as a Reagan Republican will come back to haunt her and the switch from support to criticism will tell us a great deal about the people who are supporting her now but who will withdraw that support if she actual got the nomination. However, I do not believe that is even a remote possibility and that she will not run in the first place.

Those are my predictions at this point, from the perspective of an amateur political commentator. They are worth whatever anyone thinks they are worth.

Thats a probability some need to accept. We cannot afford them all three branches..

to the top, corporate dominance, destroying the environment for short term profits and political calculus, and further gutting our civil liberties on the alter of the surveillance state?

Of course the spouted answer will be "WINNING", my focus is on what that "winning" actually translates to. Elections are a means, not an end.

Bernie is very smart will not run as a third party.

He will do somewhat better than Dennis Kucinich, but that's about it. That's my prediction. You can take it for whatever you think it is worth. DU is not predictive of what the general primary electorate will do.

I got it written down so I could refer to it later. I've bookmarked it.

This does not indicate personal preference as the only preference at the moment is.
Not Jeb Bush.
Not Mitt Romney.
Not any other operative the GOP can find in a gutter.

depressed because so many here have selected her as an option. .

I know I did in 2008.

Evidence before them to come to such conclusion

You are right its not

You just dont like the results...you just disagree with us Democrats..

on this little silly DU poll which also means nothing between the top three Bernie, Liz and Hillary, Hillary is one vote ahead in the field.

Edited to add a link to an interesting read.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/11/17/inevitability-trap

64%!

wrong. Things change.

Who polls ahead of every republican...let us Democrats know mmmkay!

Until you can do that.....stop critcising the one who can..

a Dem his message will resonate with much of the party. Don't get me wrong, I like Hillary I think she's one hell of an awesome woman. Just not what we need in the White House.

Again when you do have a DEMOCRAT who can....let us know...in fact Bernie polled in single digits to Hillarys 64% which thusfar vrtually irrelevent.

You think my opinion gave her 64% approval ratings?

Thanks.

and even the general when compared with those predicted to run against her.

But that's just my memory. Truth is, we will all know pretty soon how much support she has.

well. I agree soon we will know how deep her support is.

When Obama became the nominee I of course jumped on board. I still wonder if she would have done a better job, but that will forever remain an unknown.

myself. I will say that IMO in regard to healthcare reform, she would have fought tooth and nail for a public option to start. One of the great unknowns. It is what it is.

But we have to move forward. If she gets elected and if we can take back at least the Senate, she can accomplish a lot. She is a determined and dedicated Democrat.

become more awake, aware, active, and ethical, it will be the candidate with the strongest corporate connections and the weakest incentive to serve voters.

It's going to be the one who has the most populist agenda. That will crank up the grass roots moves in Iowa and New Hampshire and into South Carolina. With those behind him/her, and the others who are getting asterisks as results, realizing that they're an also ran and nothing more, the money will flow in like water as Corporations seek to get some early influence going.

Of course, that might be a bit "too liberal" for her fans who claim she's a liberal.

Sanders, Warren, Biden and Clinton will all probably be viewed as too old.
Kucinich is way too left to win in a general election.
O'Malley's views and record on gun control will NOT win him votes in most of the South, Southwest, Midwest and may of the purple states needed to win. Combine this with the loss of the Maryland governorship to the Republicans suggests that O'Malley wasn't very popular at the end of this term.

My own prediction is that the nominee for both parties will be a state governor and will be in their late 50's or very early 60's. I really don't see the country elected to the Presidency another member of Congress at this point in time. Historically it is VERY rare for a President to come directly from Congress.

If Warren articulates her message well and campaigns well, I think she would win the election by a wide margin. Her proposals are popular but we as a party don't defend them enough. Low info voters don't even match their views with the right candidates. I voted for Warren.

Clinton could definitely win, though my fear is she's more conservative than Obama, making her desire to compromise less not mean as much.

O'Malley kind of lost ground IMO even though it wasn't really his fault. Not sure what got into MD.

Sanders would be a great President but not sure he could win because of the socialist label (being socialist is good, but you know this country).

Kucinich I like a lot but not sure he is even interested in running.

Biden probably wouldn't be a good choice unless Obama gets his popularity up.

and are sick and tired of being burned by bought politicians. Sanders will speak the truth, and people will recognize it and know they can trust him.

I like a lot of what EW says, but still don't see why she remained a Republican during the Reagan years - she has some 'splaining to do imo.

But Democrats.....polls show otherwise

which is why Pres. Obama made a special point of saying he hears them too.

Biden has a lot of crossover appeal, at least where I live, and in fact he just helped push my new Rep over the edge in a tight race. He's also the only one of the six who's held national office. The problem is I don't see Biden getting very far in the primaries, which the Clintons have spent the last decade sewing up. It's a shame Hillary can't appoint him for another veep run because I think he'd be an asset just like he was for Barack. She can probably still win the general with with another veep, if she chooses wisely (not Warren or Sanders), but it's going to be a bumpy ride with road kill aplenty and we might win the battle but lose the war.

Here's hoping for sunshine and roses anyway.

is with Hil......

say what she really thinks. If she wins the nominations it'll be Alison Grimes all over again but on a national level.