Many of you know I am not against the current Democratic establishment.

[NCTraveler]

I think the party structure, direction, and people are in just about the best shape they have been in decades. Our platform really has me excited. It's a template to proudly move forward on. We have some funding problems at the national party level but that is often the case outside of major elections.

Some names have been thrown out for 2020 when it comes to possible Democratic Presidential contenders. Some I really like, some not so much. All the names I have seen so far I would like to see in the primary.

What I'm finding interesting is that a number of the names that have come out have then been attacked in short order. Some potential candidates are clearly elevating their national status and are being quickly attacked. Many of these attacks give the appearance that they are coming from the establishment or those who support the establishment, like myself. It's something I'm not too keen on and admittedly could be reading it wrong.

I'm ok with all of it as it's political maneuvering. This early in the game it's difficult to tell the exact direction or game-plan.

I think this is more than simple vetting. I think the attacks are directed.

If I'm correct, are these candidates simply being weakened until the establishment coalesce around someone? Is there already a name being thrown around in the establishment circles? The only one I can think of would be Joe Biden. I wouldn't vote for him in a primary, period. Yeah, I get it. I'm claiming to be pro-establishment yet wouldn't support Mr. Establishment in a primary. It's because Biden himself has a long history of being far to the right of our platform today. I will support someone further to the left in the primary if her were to run. I love Joe on a personal level. Not big on some of his politics.

To be fair, some of the attacks are on possible candidates that most of us would consider to be supportive of the establishment. That said, they still appear to be coming from a single direction.

Your thoughts.....

[marble falls]

1. I think an unexamined life is a shame and a an over-examined one is a tragedy. Right now we need ...

be putting it together not picking it apart, something a lot argue has cost the Democratic Party a lot of elections.

[NCTraveler]

3. Building and not destroying. +1

"putting it together not picking it apart"

[Demsrule86]

8. What you suggest is not building...it tears apart any unity.

We have a primary...candidates run, we vote...that is all she wrote folks...sometimes you win sometimes you lose in terms of who ends up the nominee...meaning getting your person...but let's not let hard feelings get in the way of winning the General...I am no enjoying Trump having unfettered power.

[NCTraveler]

9. Can you point me to my suggestion?

I don't see where I made one.

[Demsrule86]

20. The idea that the establishment picks the nominee...I heard that same thing last time...maybe I

misunderstood your post...if so sorry. Voters pick the nominee is my poin. I must say in re-reading my post it was too harsh period so sorry.

[Hortensis]

24. And that it's apparently united in destroying fairly mainstream

candidates years ahead of time. These are not the Bernies and Steins under attack.

NC, I applaud your first paragraph, but I think you're way off.

There are plots to destroy our ability to take power in 2018 and 2020, but they're not coming from us, they're coming from ruthless American and Eurasian conservative power blocs.

Those last are already engaged in war to keep and increase their power. The stakes are enormous for them, not just us.

And they are feeding the results of their strategies to a 24/7/356 media that itself needs to poke a sharp stick into a relatively dormant subject as far as by far most readers are concerned.

[Hortensis]

24. And that it's apparently united in destroying fairly mainstream

candidates years ahead of time. These are not the Bernies and Steins under attack.

NC, I applaud your first paragraph, but I think you're way off.

There are plots to destroy our ability to take power in 2018 and 2020, but they're not from us, they're coming from our own right and Eurasia's.

Imo, you'd do better to ASK yourself WHO is behind these names being floated. Those last are already engaged in war to keep and increase their power.

Whoever whose are, are feeding a 24/7/356 media that itself needs to poke a sharp stick into a relatively dormant subject as far as by far most readers are concerned.

[rzemanfl]

28. What do they do the other nine days?

Keyboards.

[Hortensis]

31. Lol. They gather at the trough while their agents continue.

[Anny61]

2. I agree with what you are saying. It does seem to be a correlated effort to put one person forefront

There is not a Democratic Leader that we have I would not be thrilled to get into the White House. There might be some I prefer over others, but all our Dems will do a good job. They are smart, informed, aware, capable.

[rzemanfl]

29. Posting fast. Welcome to DU. n/t

[L. Coyote]

4. "democratic establishment" is both an oxymoron and not true by definition.

In simple terms, there is no such beast. Leadership of OUR party is selected at regular intervals, and those who sit on the sidelines are the problem.

If there is a definable problem, it is the role of money. Candidate selection has more to do with who gets funded, the least democratic part of the process. That is where attention to reform should be placed. This is one reason I like caucuses.

[NCTraveler]

5. I strongly disagree.

There is a clear distinction between rank and file, many elected Democrats, and the power structure. To ignore that is to ignore reality.

You claim there is no "democratic establishment" and then go on to list problems you have with the establishment in your last paragraph.

No one questions if there is a democratic establishment in honest. It's just not possible. You have to be able to see the power divides and structures.

I've never understood fear of the word establishment to the point some will simply ignore reality in order to claim it doesn't exist.

[Demsrule86]

15. There is an entire thread devoted to telling a fund raiser for a particular candidate who

is by the way facing a tough re-election to 'fuck off'...many on this particular thread opine that they won't donate to certain candidates or the Democratic Party...based on the Franken debacle mostly. So funding is always determined by how much money is available. You have good funding, you can take chances on a number of races you couldn't without proper funding...I have seen folks here state they won't support the Democratic Party and then complain bitterly when their special election candidate received little or no funding. You can't have it both ways folks...you can't rage against lobbyist donors and yet refuse to support the Democratic Party because they do things you don't like...and then expect them to manage election miracles...the next step in this tragedy is to wring your hands and call for a complete overhaul of the Democratic Party when we lose. But really some should look in the mirror for the culprit...loyalty my friends. Remember we are trying to stop an abomination called Trump.

[L. Coyote]

30. We all know the trump/russia trolls are not going to donate to Dems and tell others not to

for whatever the trending excuse might be

[Demsrule86]

32. You have a good point...always a reason. I swear I saw some who were on the other side before

Franken resigned saying the same thing.

[L. Coyote]

34. Same old, same old as during the primaries, divide and conquer, and it worked very well ....

.... because so many fools fell for it. And, they seem to have not learned from the experience.

[SFnomad]

17. And caucuses are one of the least democratic parts of our selection process

I would be all for abolishing them.

[Demsrule86]

33. I agree. They should be abolished.

[Demsrule86]

6. I object to your characterization of Joe Biden. I think his age is a concern but he is a good guy.

I think you are basically talking about the old meme...the establishment chose 'her' as if somehow other candidates didn't get a fair shake which is not true. The person who will be the nominee will be the one who wins the primary...it could be anyone at this point. People already have their favorites, but it is too bad to attack any Democrat at this time...when the dust settles no matter who wins, we vote for the nominee even if it is someone who you think is to the right or the left or what have you.

[NCTraveler]

7. "I think his age is a concern but he is a good guy."

I think he is a great guy. Truly.

I would vote for Charlie Crist if here were the nominee.

[Demsrule86]

16. I would vote for any Democrat too. I just don't want the candidate to come out of the primary as

damaged goods. We have to remember that the GOP is our ultimate target. I really think some turn to Joe out of fear that no one else can do it.

[NCTraveler]

18. I have no clue why people think Joe can do it over anyone else.

I really like him a lot but think people place a lot of false hope on him.

"out of fear that no one else can do it."

[Demsrule86]

19. I am not sure either...maybe they associate him with Obama...

[NCTraveler]

21. I would like to be associated with either one.

Two people I greatly admire.

[Demsrule86]

23. I agree completely...I love Obama and met Joe Biden several times. He is the real deal...

a gentleman with a big heart.

[rgbecker]

10. I think the DU should play a part.

We need a 2020 personality forum. DUers should put up ideas for Candidates and inform other DUers of the positive and negative attributes of their ideas. Why wait around for "the establishment" and the media to make what should be our decision. The primary process is great but many form their opinions long before Iowa and New Hampshire. And most primaries occur long after the "Party" and media have made their decision.

Here's my input:

Elizabeth Warren.

Plus: 1. Very progressive on Healthcare, financial reform, income and wealth inequality.
2. Woman without any risk of being called out on sexual Harassment.
3. Little baggage from her work as Massachusetts Senator and Harvard Professor.

Minus: 1. Speaks little about foreign relation issues and needs more experience in that area.
2. Sounds a little school teacherish in her speeches.
3. Not a spring chicken. Born 1949.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Warren

I'd like to hear from other DUers about little known Democrats they have found interesting as potential 2020 Presidential candidates.

[NCTraveler]

13. That would be great, but we are Democrats, after all.

[Joe941]

12. Best shape? Al Franken - nuff said.

[NCTraveler]

14. "nuff said"

I guess. I think there will be a lot more said and none of it will have to do with Franken.

[elleng]

22. a rather lengthy way to say NO to Joe Biden.

[guillaumeb]

26. Given what we have already seen regarding possible Russian interference,

it is reasonable to assume that such interference will continue because it makes sense from the standpoint of power politics to do what one can to weaken an opponent.

The US is unquestionably the dominant military power, but Vietnam and a multitude of other countries are proof that military power is not the only type of power.

So in that light, I would assume that any candidate from either party will be attacked by front organizations. Trump is an easily manipulated idiot, so Putin undoubtedly backed him for that reason.

[L. Coyote]

35. Sen. Kristin Gillibrand is a true leader on the women's equality front. We need more of her.

Link to tweet