Any Thoughts on "Plan B" if Hillary Doesn't Run..Or, Declares and has Health Problem and Withdraws?

[KoKo]

Since Hillary seems to be the current frontrunner and it's almost three years until Election 2014 shouldn't we Dems be thinking about a "PLAN B?" Is there any Dem who could step in?

Who are Dems who could be as strong as Obama and Clinton in Party Name Recognition who could be either her VP Candidate or the Nominee in the event she has to withdraw.

Any thoughts?

[NoOneMan]

1. What makes her everyone's Plan A?

Look, the primaries will sort all this out. No need to worry about it now. In fact, its pretty counter-productive to

[bigwillq]

3. She's not even my Plan Z

Still have no idea who is my Plan A to Y, but I know I don't want Hillary.

[ScreamingMeemie]

17. +1

Man, we have been on the same page for going on 11 years now.

[bigwillq]

21. That's because we are so cool!

How about those Lions!!!

[ScreamingMeemie]

25. That game was craaaaazy!

Fun to watch.

[bigwillq]

38. So happy the Lions won.

Especially since they beat the Cowboys!!

G-Men only 2 games back! LOL

[FogerRox]

42. 30-31 good news for #NYG, yup.

[winter is coming]

62. She's my plan 9 from outer space.

[KoKo]

4. Who do you think would run in the primaries?

Any names?

[NoOneMan]

5. I don't have a clue

You don't either. So picking a single candidate now from an unknown pool this early is premature. We don't even know what the political climate will be in 2 years, and the best candidate to handle that (as well as handle the narratives of the opposition). 2016 could be a dark horse year where someone we would not even put on the short list just connects with the people, times and issues

[davidpdx]

47. +1

I couldn't have said it any better.

[Whisp]

98. The Clinton disinformation machine are the Planners of Plan A.

I think it's ridiculous to try to have people believe there is no one out there but Hillary. Nonsense. And I would bet my last nickel a very large percentage of this 'Hillary will Save Us!' crap is coming right out of the same camp that said McCain would have been a better President than Obama. The Clinton Camp. Manipulative bunch.

[cliffordu]

100. How you extrapolated that bogus posit is awe inspiring.

[Whisp]

103. Always glad to awe. n/t

[brooklynite]

104. 17 million votes in the 2008 Primary

...or doesn't that count?

[NoOneMan]

110. No, it doesn't count.

1. That was 2008.

2. Those people didn't represent a majority then, and they certainly do not now. Frankly, some of those people might even prefer mystery candidate #3, if we were so inclined to let the primary process produce such a mystery candidate.

Jesse Jackson got 7 million votes in the 1988 primary. That didn't automatically transform him into everyone's plan A come 1992

[brooklynite]

116. ...except that Hillary's 17 million represented virtually the same vote total that Obama got...

...I seem to recall he did well.

In any event, all I see in this thread from the "I'll never vote for Hillary" people, is the usually lazy fantasizing about candidates who won't be running; if I were as concerned about Hillary as you folks are, I'd be talking about how to GET an acceptable candidate into the race, not who you hope will run.

[NoOneMan]

118. You don't get it. That was the 2008 primary. There is supposed to be a 2016 primary

That process alone will determine the most preferred candidate by the people for the issues and challenges of 2016, against the most popular Republican candidates that are being presented.

No, her old primary votes don't count for a different time during a different set of challenges. They don't mean shit. Lieberman's do not either. That's why people have primaries. People change. Issues change. Nations change.

[brooklynite]

119. You're waiting for candidates to present themselves...

I'm making sure the candidates I like will be there.

I've talked privately with Brian Schweitzer. My wife and I have been approached by "Ready for Hillary". I can support both of their positions, and I think both are viable. If there's no candidate I like in the race, it won't be because I didn't try to get one.

[NoOneMan]

122. Its 2013! Yes, I am waiting

For the love of god.....


Hey, its never to early to start campaigning for 2020

[brooklynite]

123. Hey Gang! Let's put on a show!

My dad has a barn we can use and...

It would be great if campaigns only lasted a year. They don't. Accept reality or change the Constitution.

[leftstreet]

2. No one has her brand recognition

The result of the GOP's 'plan B' is probably all these weirdos like Cruz etc in the news. Just in case

[RC]

37. That's why we should find someone else.

How about someone a little whole less to the Right? Like maybe someone not a 3rd Way or DLC, for a change?

[DURHAM D]

6. Sadly, we don't have a bench.

I don't see anyone for 2016.

[KoKo]

13. I wonder why we don't have a Bench. And back ups.

No outstanding Dem Governors or even Senators who would be likely candidates?

Where is the "grooming" that parties do. Repugs seem to have a stacked deck of crazies...waiting in the wings.

Where is our Paul Wellstone or anyone like him.

I do like Bernie Sanders but he only caucuses with the Democrats. And, Warren is such a young Senator (says she doesn't want to run)...as much as I love her outspoken views about Wall Street Greed and Corruption how could she handle the criticism of her lack of political experience?

Alan Grayson? He's feisty and speaks out and I like him also...but, is he strong enough to get elected?

I'm trying to think of others that could catch on quickly with the people who aren't older like Biden.

Could we accept someone like NYC Mayor Bloomberg? He was supposedly a Dem before he was a Repug...but then look at his record ....Stop and Frisk and Occupy Wall Street Shut Down.

There are some others...(like Cuomo)but they are DINO's/Repug Lite....

[JimDandy]

56. Warren would handle the criticism the same way Obama did..

By WINNING!

[tabasco]

7. Sez who?

You?

[KoKo]

16. Says...Asking...Who do You think is a Back Bencher for Dems....

Repugs have overflowing crowd of crazies waiting for the annointment. And...Huntsman and Bloomberg plus.......Cuomo and Christie.

[CherokeeDem]

8. Personally...

I would love to see Howard Dean or Gov. Martin O'Malley of MD... but realistically at this moment.. Hillary is the one to beat. I agree with the poster who said it is to early to make any definitive statements. Who knows what will happen in the next two years.?

All I know is I want the Democrats to be realistic and choose the candidate that can win. If that's Hillary so be it.... even a Democrat who is more moderate than we want is better than putting any Repub/Tea Bagger in office. That would be disastrous.

[KoKo]

18. My post is about ...What if Hillary doesn't decide to run..Health Problem or whatever..

What Dem Candidate could Replace her with Name Recognition and Creds to WIN against the Repugs in 2016. Statistics show...that Two Termers of either Party tend to have the Opposite Party WIN in the next election because Americans want CHANGE.

That's why we Dems need to be looking FORWARD to find a Slate of Candidates to create a Buzz in 2016.

[Agschmid]

80. +1 to Gov. Martin O'Malley of MD!

[FSogol]

114. I second the O'Malley nomination. n/t

[meadowlark5]

9. What about Joe Biden?

I've been reading he's been doing things that make it look like he may make a run for it. Can't name any specifics. Just read it in passing.

I don't know if he'd make it very far since the late show comics and pretty much everyone makes him out as some kind of boob.

[davidpdx]

48. As much as I love Biden

I don't think he'll run. He's had a fantastic career and I think he's going to decide to retire after being VP for 8 years.

[Le Taz Hot]

134. Actually, I think if Hillary didn't run

he would be the first to throw his hat into the ring. How many times has he run for president now? I lost count but the point is, he wants the job. He's too much of a party insider to openly go against Hillary but if she weren't in the picture, I've no doubt he'd step right up. Of course, policywise, there's no difference between the two which sucks for progressives but that's another thread.

[davidpdx]

135. I'm not sure about that so I'll respectively disagree

Yes he has run quite a few times, but getting to be VP for 8 years that's a BFD (as Biden himself would say). He may not have succeeded in his goal of being president, but he did make it to the White House. I don't see him running whether or not Clinton runs.

To me the bigger issue is the whole let's shove Hillary for president down people's throats three years before the election and 26 months before the first primary. That is getting old.

[kestrel91316]

57. Joe is currently 70. He will be 73 in 2016. That makes me a little hesitant.

[Zorra]

10. Great OP subject, Koko. Thanks!

Unfortunately, I'm stumped at the moment.

[KoKo]

14. I..know...I kept thinking who could be alternatives.

Howard Dean made a statement he would be outspoken for Dem Left issues..and it was posted here on DU...a few months ago. But, now he's in the Hillary Camp.

I just wish we had a "Back Bench" as poster "DURHAM D" pointed out. WHERE IS the Back Bench of younger and hungry Dems?

What's more worrisome is WHY don't we have a Back Bench..when the Repugs Bench is full...even though they are losers.

Here's my worry: John Huntsman has been going around the country speaking to older crowds here and there. I think he's going to run and also NYC Mayor Bloomberg.

There will be lots of action and push on Repug Side for more "Moderate Dems" to get buzz going against the Radical Right of Dem Party.

But...on OUR SIDE?

[pangaia]

29. I think that's the whole point.

They want us stumped. The fix is almost in.

[TorchTheWitch]

11. Like it's going to make a difference?

Whoever steps up and runs will do so and that's what we get. No point at all even thinking about it until there's a crop throwing their hat in the ring. And frankly, I hope to God Hillary isn't Plan A and that she doesn't run at all. I can't bloody stand her DLC self.

[clydefrand]

12. Well, if not Hillary, then I'd like to see

someone who has said SHE will not run - that of course being Michele O.
If she ran and won, wouldn't that frost the repubs
Other than that, I'll have to agree, there is no other 'front runner' out there, however, who ever runs
should beat any Repuke that would run.

[Warren DeMontague]

15. Elizabeth Warren. Al Gore. I suppose Biden's always a possibility.

Howard Dean.

In terms of up and comers, I look at someone like Gavin Newsom. A lot of potential.

[KoKo]

19. Who is Gavin Newsome and why do you like him?

[Warren DeMontague]

44. Gavin Newsom is the current Lt. Governor of California.

I like him because he got out ahead of the party on LGBT marriage equality and ending marijuana prohibition, among other issues.

http://www.gavinnewsom.com/

[KoKo]

45. He looks young...and has good Issue...what else do you know about him

on Issues that Dems Care about. How does he stand on SS/Medicare/Drone Wars/Freedom of Speech against Spying.

[Warren DeMontague]

49. I admit that when he first ran for SF Mayor I thought he was a blow-dried Marina yuppie.

Those are good questions. I don't believe he's made too many wide-ranging statements on Foreign Policy, given that his focus is mainly California right now, but he does sit on the center-left side of the party as I understand it.

[JI7]

20. than whoever wants to run will run like they always do ?

people always decide to run based on many things. some look at what they think their chances are . there are many who will not run if Hillary runs just because they don't think they have a chance against her.

so if she doesn't run there will be others who will get in the race as always and states will vote as always.

[KoKo]

23. As Dem...who would you like to see run? That's what this post is about...

Looking for the "Back Bench" of Dems as "Durham D" poster put out above link in this thread.

Where is the Democratic Back Bench...and who would you want to see run for President if Hillary (given her age and former health problems) has a problem and had to pull out.

I believe in "FAIL SAFES." We Dems really do need to keep OUR ISSUES on the FRONT BURNER!

[randome]

22. Three years until 2014?

Forget the bad math, the only thing we should be focused on is: 2014!

FUCK 2016!

2014201420142014201420142014201420142014201420142014201420142014201420142014201420142014201420142014201420142014

What more does anyone need to hear? FUCK 2016!

I would have no problem whatsoever if Skinner forbade the numbers 2016 from being posted UNTIL AFTER 2014!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[treestar]

26. +1

or, +2014

[randome]

28. The Democrats can't get organized. OWS can't get organized. Even DU CAN'T GET ORGANIZED!

Sometimes it's very depressing.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Vashta Nerada]

35. Agreed.

[Chan790]

77. We can't wait until after 2014 to start on 2016.

By then it will be too late.

Believe it or not, work for 2008 quietly started in earnest for both Clinton and Obama in mid 2005. If we focus on 2014, we will lose the White House in 2016. A successful Presidential campaign starts three years out laying groundwork and building support-bases; you need to have all that in concrete before you declare...and you should declare as close to the midterm preceding as possible.

You can focus on 2014 if you want...no, wait. NO. Fuck 2014 Unless you're working on a 2014 House campaign...you'd better be focused on 2016.

[jeff47]

113. That work was not done by us.

That groundwork was done by their campaigns. There are various campaigns that have similarly started laying groundwork.

You know what they don't need right now? Our help.

You know who does need our help? Everyone running in 2014.

And if you think we should ignore state races like in 2010, you're repeating our massive mistake.

[CK_John]

24. Any one who runs without opposition gets no media attention and lets the GOP put on a circus.

[KoKo]

30. If it's Hillary...should Candidate run to the LEFT or the RIGHT of HER..for

Name Recognition.

I'm trying to think of a way a Dem Candidate "Dark Horse" could position themself against PowerHorses Obama and Clinton Legacy.

How would they be able to Counter the Right of the Repug Party and get Dems out to vote?

Or would the CHANGE Obama Ran On already be in place by 2016..and therefore the Repugs would be in their Dirt Hole Bunker trying to dig themself out of their RW/Confederate Flag Waving , Christian Fundie and the rest Fox Holes to try to DEFEAT a SECOND TWO TERM DEM that would FOLLOW OBAMA?

How would that work? We are Dems we Twice Elected a Dem President with Clinton and Obama. We are ON A ROLL!

So...what do we do AFTER THIS? Who is thinking about this and working to KEEP US IN THE MAJORITY OF AMERICAN VOTERS?

WHO and WHAT CANDIDATES?

[treestar]

27. Martin O'Malley

Julian Castro.
Bill Richardson.

[davidpdx]

50. O'Malley I'd consider after getting to know more about him

Castro maybe too inexperienced at this point, but I would never rule it out down the road. He could be the first Hispanic president. Richardson is one of the three I don't think will run (the other two being Clinton and Biden). I honestly don't think we'll see anyone from 2008 on the D side run again.

[reddread]

31. there are certainly many possible scenarios

Except of course selecting a candidate who isnt "serious" enough to get the support of real money interests.
Its their election to decide, well in advance of any low level discussions or pretentious polling booth activities.

[SamYeager]

32. I'd like to see Karen Gillibrand run if Hillary doesn't n/t

[RFKHumphreyObama]

63. I think you mean Kirsten Gillibrand?

[SamYeager]

65. D'oh

Slip of the finger when typing on my phone. I accepted the wrong autocorrect.

[arely staircase]

33. who knows?

Im not worried. Who would have thought a jug eared black man who's middle name is Hussein and whose last name rhymes with Osama would kick all they asses this time eight years ago. I am for Clinton but we have talent and skills regardless.

[Vashta Nerada]

34. She's not my Plan A.

She's not even my Plan Z.

We need someone better than her.

[AtomicKitten]

85. mine neither

I'd be very happy if Al Gore or Dr. Dean threw their hats in the ring again.

[JoePhilly]

96. And who is that going to be?

[OmahaBlueDog]

36. Then it becomes a lot more challenging to beat Chris Christie

...assuming they don't go nuts and run Cruz/Palin, which is not outside the realm of possibility.

My theory is that we'll run against Christie and Susanna Martinez as VP.

Conventional wisdom is that, if we don't pick Hillary, then we'd have these frontrunners: Brian Schweitzer, Martin O'Malley, Joe Biden, and Al Gore

Some names I've thrown out as possibilities before: Missouri Governor Jay Nixon; Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy, and Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick.

I take Elizabeth Warren at her word that she doesn't want to run.

[KoKo]

40. Thank you for at least providing a List of Dems we could "check out"

and Rally Around.

[davidpdx]

52. People seem to think Christie will run

but I think they are making way too much hay out of it. The guy may have gotten elected governor of NJ, but his personality is not suited for running for nor winning a presidential election.

I think there are plenty of people that could run on our side. People are just looking to pigeonhole the prospects to make it look as though one person is our savior.

In my opinion neither Clinton nor Biden will run. I also agree Warren won't run.

[OmahaBlueDog]

74. Christie will run. Tht became clear when he announced the weight loss surgery.

He's a Red Governor in a Blue state that would be very helpful (from the GOP persective) to pick up. That's one factor. Another is that he's perceived (rightly or wrongly) as a get-things-done kind of guy. Working with the President on Sandy, along with his recent refusal to continue to pursue the legal battle against same-sex marriage (despite GOP pressure) have reinforced his image as a pragmatist.

Political independents tend to like (or at least be amused by) his blunt-spokenness. He's also done well on appearances on shows like "Letterman." So from that perspective, I disagree that his personality is not suited for running.

He has drawbacks. He's not favored by the Tea Partiers, and they will argue that he'll be Romney-All-Over-Again. OTOH, his record on issues is very conservative, and won't might not appeal to the mass electorate under scrutiny.

I think it's clear Hillary Clinton intends to run. Whether she ultimately does remains to be seen. I agree that Biden will most likely not run. One thing to keep in mind -- in the fall of 2005, how many people thought Barack Obama would be the nominee in 2008? In October 1989, how many people thought Bill Clinton would be the next President?

[napi21]

126. My #1 would be Brian Schweitzer, but he's said any, many, times

he doesn't want to live in DC, doesn't want to leave his beloved State, and doesn't want on anyone's list! I believe him.

[polichick]

39. imo Plan A better involve a populist Dem, not another corporate Dem...

For the WH, as well as Congress.

Unless we'd like the 1% to have the little that's left.

[X_Digger]

41. It's 2013, for crissakes. 9 months into PBO's second term.

Come talk to us after the mid-terms.

[FreeJoe]

43. Warren

Biden, Cuomo, Klobuchar, O'Malley

[KoKo]

46. O'Malley sounds like a new name. Why would you support him...where does

he stand on issues YOU care about personally..and why do you think he would be a good candidate for Dem Party.

I've seen his name thrown out on DU but haven't researched him. So...WHY do you like him and that he might be a Candidate?

[elleng]

55. He's a fine governor (MD,)

and is sound on our issues.

[KoKo]

60. okay..will do some research on him on my own. Thanks! n/t

[DireStrike]

59. Ugh Klobuchar and Cuomo -nt-

[TBF]

51. Julian Castro - San Antonio's popular mayor

Is definitely an up and comer. I think of him as VP material and hope Hillary considers him.

[Historic NY]

54. Hey the Irish & Latino ticket.....

O'Malley & Castro.

[Rstrstx]

71. As VP *maybe*

I love him but he's only served as a councilman and mayor, he needs to pad his resume to have a chance to run for president (governor, senator...). VP might work, it would be fast-tracking him.

[TBF]

90. Very successful mayor of top 10 city -

he's been bringing business to San Antonio and has a lot of charisma. I don't see him as first on the ticket and he'd have to be vetted ... but Hillary is also loved by latinos in Texas (when I was working on the Obama campaign many of the local folks told me they would work for Obama but they really wanted her).

I see him more for 2020 or 2024 (he'll only be 50 in 2024) but he's one of the best rising up that I see.

I'd love to hear about others in the country ... it seems like the bench is not very deep right now. Cory Booker is the other one I've heard about but he seems a little more controversial.

[elleng]

53. Joe Biden, Eliz Warren,

Martin O'Malley, Kirsten Gillibrand

[protect our future]

58. Sherrod Brown

[KoKo]

61. I like him..!

[RFKHumphreyObama]

64. Mark Warner -Elizabeth Warren

[Chan790]

79. I can't see those two running together.

Warner is the epitome of everything Warren opposes. He's big business, entitlement cuts, tax cuts for the wealthy and firmly pro-bank. Very fiscally conservative, socially moderate. One of the first people in Congress to back the Simpson-Bowles plan.

[emsimon33]

86. Agreed. Warner serves the 2%

He is a shill.

[emsimon33]

84. Mark Warner (corporate puppet) is really more of a Republican than a Democrat

He would be another move to the right which we don't need right now.

He wasn't a bad governor but would not be a good choice for president as he is a corporate puppet.

[TBF]

91. Warner's a conservative - that's all we need. nt

[mainer]

66. Howard Dean still has my heart

How I wish he were back on the national scene.

[IrishAyes]

67. Right now my favorite VP candidate with Hillary would be one of the Castro fellows.

Then they could be pretty well assured of carrying both Texas and NY, 2 of the biggest.

If no Hillary - and I'd mourn her loss - some combination of Warren/Castro/Booker/??? There are others I like a lot but electibility must be considered. I used to want Cuomo but he's been getting some scandals lately (true or not) and you wouldn't want him for Hillary's running mate because they're both from the same state. Pragmatism must rule the heart if we want to win as many places as possible. For instance, no matter how much I adore Kucinich and Bernie Sanders, I wouldn't make a $5 bet on either one to win.

For me that's what matters most - getting the strongest candidates within a reasonable political circle so that we can WIN. Otherwise you'll find another bunch of Repukes sitting in Congress laughing their arses off at us while we shiver out in the cold with nothing but our purity blankets to huddle under.

[libdem4life]

68. The question is who can raise a billion dollars? Can we have Twin VPs? One of them, definitely.

Purity blankets, indeed.

[IrishAyes]

70. I meant one of the Castros, not both at the same time.

Even if that was what I wanted, we'd be back to square one with 2 candidates from the same state. That's another reason I think Biden would be ill advised to run for president even though he'd make a great one; yes he helped President Obama get elected, but that's different. All other things being equal, you have to go for the most electoral votes. FDR didn't like Truman but needed Missouri. The Kennedys detested Johnson but needed Texas. Etc etc.

[libdem4life]

72. Sorry...tongue in cheek a bit...who could choose one of them for VP?

Not only could they possibly bring Texas, but their Hispanic roots and background are impeccable. The one issue could be that their mother was extremely left wing back in the day, La Raza Unida, but seems like they have dealt with it in Texas.

[IrishAyes]

73. One twin for governor, the other for VP. I like 'em both. And when a person gets the nod

for the keynote speech at the national convention, you know that's almost an anointing. Brother Bill will be campaigning his heart out as always, so who he likes for Hillary's running mate will definitely factor in.

[emsimon33]

87. One of the Castros for VP is a great idea

Might turn Texas BLUE!

[IrishAyes]

92. Didn't mean to leave out up-and-comers like Wendy Davis either

But you won't win with a female-only ticket, and she's still young enough to have more time left than Hillary, as the Castros do. I don't mean be silly and take turns, but rather play our hand well. Politics is a whole lot like poker.

[Cali_Democrat]

69. Two words:

Michelle Obama

[DevonRex]

75. Good question, Koko!

I really like Warren. My husband says she's too bland. I understand what he means but I wish people could just listen to what she says without demanding fireworks.

[LTR]

76. Brian Schweitzer

Former governor of Montana. Making some noise about running. Would be a pretty solid candidate.

The Dems do have a pretty decent bench. At least compared to the GOP.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2016

[CTyankee]

106. How about a Gillibrand/Schweitzer ticket?

Good East/West combo. Woman at the top of the ticket and she's young and very personable. Schweitzer brings in Westerners and provides the ticket with a Western viewpoint.

There! I've solved the problem for you guys!

Any questions?

[Th1onein]

78. HOWARD DEAN

[emsimon33]

82. Great idea. I posted Elizabeth Warren before I saw your post!

Dean is great and has executive experience as governor of Vermont.

[Th1onein]

88. I think Dean/Warren would be a great team.

I have my fingers crossed that the GOP will show it's stupid a$$ again and actually completely self-destruct before election day.

[emsimon33]

81. Elizabeth Warren as Plan A

[Pretzel_Warrior]

83. Corey Booker

Just to fuck with the racists and the purists.

[libdem4life]

97. He's a treasure. Literally. His entire campaign was funded by the dreaded, evil corporations.

The other guy, "what's-his-name", got next to nothing. Somebody linked the stats here.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

99. so he'd be perfect for president according to some here.

[libdem4life]

105. He'd get my vote, absolutely. Pragmatism is another word for Winning.

[Spider Jerusalem]

89. She was the frontrunner in 2006. She was inevitable. It was going to be a coronation.

And then...it wasn't. Funny how things work out, sometimes. I have no doubt that should Hillary decline to run a worthy candidate will emerge through the primary process and build a national profile. (and who do the Republicans have who could win nationally, besides Chris Christie, who may not get the nomination because the Tea Partiers hate him?)

[libdem4life]

93. Jeb Bush and his Hispanic wife. Governors can get away with being oveweight, but can't

think of a national candidate...doesn't mean there wasn't one...but none that comes to mind that was not somewhat fit. It's even more important than the age. Christie might have a hard time getting Big Money for a national run. Risky. He just doesn't look healthy enough for it, IMO.

Surely an overweight woman would not even be considered. When Hillary had her stroke, there were lots of questions about fitness and rightfully so.

We may be over-valuing the Tea Party. It is waning as the Moderates, with the help of Big Money, want their party back and are likely to get it...reinforced by little RNC money to the TP. Big Money has stated it is going to support Moderates with their own kind of purity test. The TP will still be around, but Bachmann and Cruz, their standard holders, look daffier by the day.

My prediction is that the net loss of Republican seats will be heavily Tea Partiers...targeted by the Democrats also as weak incumbents. Not all, but a good number of them.

Hillary/DNC will be helping down ticket Dems for 2014, raising her visibility again and getting results...McAullife being the successful start. She will only help those she and Bill think can win...not necessarily ideologically the same, but ones who can win. Coattails in the 2016 elections.

A bit of "impure" reality, there is NO WAY to the White House for either party without significant corporate support. One billion dollars does not come by way of small donations. 120 million people voted in 2012. Divide that into a billion in 2016...just short of $10 per voter. Obscene, but reality...2012 statistics.

Total money spent by Obama and the pro-Obama super PAC Priorities USA: $853 million

Total money spent by Romney and the pro-Romney super PAC Restore Our Future: $752.3 million

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/06/presidential-election-2012_n_2036244.html

[KoKo]

94. Good points you make there. The money is key.

And, Hillary having support by keeping folks guessing might just give enough of an edge for Dems to win back seats in 2014. It's better the Clintons are there at this point because we don't have a "Bank Bench" as poster "Durham D" pointed out above.

So..filling in for the fact that we don't have strong up and coming candidates is probably not such a bad thing.

I don't believe in Presidential Dynasties nor to I support the DLC/Neo-Lib/Third way of the Clintons and those in Obama's Administration who think more of Big Business, De-Regulation and Trade Agreements that send jobs overseas and now will advantage the Big Corporations more with the upcoming TPP Agreement. So, I would wish that there were other candidates being groomed forward.

But, at this point, the Clintons with their name recognition and Big Money Backing plus support from Obama Administration appointees of their persuasion is better than nothing even though they delay any newcomers who might have emerged if we had kept with Howard Dean's "50 State Strategy." We would, hopefully, by now have a strong Dem Party Grassroots structure made up of younger Dems who were so involved in 2004/2006 they would be working through the local State Systems and contenders for higher offices. Maybe the younger Obama supporters will and are coming up, but we would have had an established group already working through to give them support on their way.

[libdem4life]

95. Pragmatism. I tend to believe that since Democrats seem to be able to think outside a box, as you

described in your third paragraph, it applies to lots of us. It's not possible for one human being to satisfy millions of voters, especially with our two-party/electoral college system. But I've noticed that pretty much all of the Presidents in the past 50 years or so have ended up governing either Center Left or Center Right.

Our Left President was assassinated....and his likely successor...JFK and RFK and then Teddy. Makes the Bushes and the Clintons pale in political comparison, and they have both leaned toward the Center.

[jeff47]

108. What waning?

What, specifically, is your evidence that the Republicans are abandoning the Teabaggers?

I know some moderates have made noises, and even gotten into races. But Fox is all teabagger, all the time. Limbaugh is all teabagger, all the time. And so on. The entire right-wing media apparatus is all teabagger.

If moderates were seizing control as you claim, that would not be the case.

Additionally, I don't see how the moderate wing seizes the media apparatus. Teabaggers are all of Fox's and Limbaugh's audiences. They go moderate, they lose to Beck and other crazies. No media, no victory.

As for Hillary, she was the inevitable winner starting in 2005. How'd that work out?

[libdem4life]

128. Not Fox, Limbaugh and Beck ... Wall Street Funding, Chamber of Commerce, and yes, Moderate

Republicans. The "baggers" will be facing primary challengers. The Democrats in some of these cases smell blood.

Yet, perhaps "distancing" would be a more appropriate word. All have publicly stated they will not support Baggers. Moderates don't tend to be "in your face". Like Jeb and McCain for instance...they suggest these folks need to switch their tactics. The bloviating trio will bloviate until the end.

I'm sure you recall there was a primary challenge and she lost. That's not difficult. Early frontrunners are often not elected. She made some mistakes. Period. The End. She learned and lives to fight another day. Pretty standard for Mrs. Clinton.

The topic was if not Hillary, then who? The question still stands.

[libdem4life]

131. Even Fox News is "waning" a bit.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/30/fox-news-drops-brandindex-republican-brand_n_4177948.html

[JoePhilly]

101. You think there would be a long list of candidates, given how much some

on the left dislike the Obama administration.

I mean nearly 5 years on, and with all of the "Obama is a secret Republican" complaints, you'd think there would be a long list of "sufficiently liberal" candidates ready to go.

Yet this thread suggests otherwise.

[lumberjack_jeff]

102. I'm not sure she's plan "A"

Howard Dean.
Patty Murray.
Alan Grayson.
Elizabeth Warren.
Bernie Sanders.

All of the above would get my support in a primary before Hillary.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

107. you and at least 20% of Dems

80% will go for Hillary

[jeff47]

111. Just like in 2008.

Your claim was made about Hillary starting in about 2005.

How'd that work out in 2008?

[lumberjack_jeff]

112. I'll support Hillary if she's the nominee.

Of if she's paired against someone who has less dedication to healthcare and the safety net.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

109. Same as Plan A.

I'll be voting for the most progressive, anti-war, pro-civil liberties, candidate on the ballot.

[jeff47]

115. Why are you repeating our mistake from 2010?

There's an election coming up in 2014. Every House seat. 1/3rd of the Senate. And a hell of a lot of governors and statehouses.

We need to be focused on those races. 2016 can take care of itself for now. Various candidates are "laying groundwork" and otherwise preparing. They do not need our help at this time. Everyone running in 2014 does need our help at this time.

[brooklynite]

117. But you misunderstand...

...the candidates who are laying groundwork are, largely, as unacceptable to the progressives as Hillary is. So if they want an acceptable candidate, they're going to need to push an acceptable name into the race -now-, or be prepared to complain in 2015 that "the powers that be" prevented "their" candidate from running.

[jeff47]

125. No, I completely understand

People who want to run for president, even if they are quite liberal, are sure they want to run.

If they have to be pushed into running you get Fred Thompson.

Meanwhile, Democrats winning big in 2014 would do far, far more for such a liberal candidate - a large victory damages all the "too liberal" news stories.

[HuckleB]

120. I've seen Kirsten Gillibrand's name discussed.

[Motown_Johnny]

121. The sitting VP is one serious option

There are others but I would think VP Biden to be heir apparent if HRC does not run.

[KoKo]

124. But..Biden would get the vote of the young....? And, believe me

I'm not into Ageism. But, realistically...can he capture the Youth Vote...and that's really even the 40 Somethings.

He should have his chance to run if he wants to, though. I just wonder if he could have health problems down the road like we had with Reagan and can he capture the Dem Party and Repug Youth vote?

Repugs have a stable of Candidates from all age groups. They can pick and choose. It might be a hard run logistically for Biden.

[Motown_Johnny]

127. Younger voters overwhelmingly support more progressive policies.

Turning them out is always the problem but I don't think there is any doubt that younger voters will support whatever (D) wins the nomination.

[UTUSN]

129. I never have a problem: A Democrat. Whoever, from whatever wing. n/t

[liberal_at_heart]

130. If Hillary doesn't run I might actually get to vote for a democrat, as long as that democrat is

someone who fights for the people and not the corporations.

[KoKo]

132. Who could emerge to the Left of Hillary?

I can't think of any Senator, House Member or Governor. Well..there's Bernie Sanders, but he's a Socialist. That wouldn't go over well in many places.

[bunnies]

133. No one ever mentions Chris Van Hollen.

http://www.ontheissues.org/house/Chris_Van_Hollen.htm

He's great on the issues and he's a hell of a campaigner.