General Discussion

winter is coming

(11,785 posts)

26. I don't think think the possible field of 2016 Dem candidates has actually been narrowed to two.

Tue Nov 12, 2013, 08:12 AM

Nov 2013

I see them as placeholders for different points of view within the party: the "reformers", who want to do something about economic inequality and the threat that unregulated banks and businesses represent to average Americans, and the "pragmatists", who represent the status quo.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

48 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why Warren? [View all] LWolf Nov 2013 OP

It hasn't been narrowed, unless people like O'Malley and Schweitzer and Warren are TwilightGardener Nov 2013 #1

While I heard some discussion of LWolf Nov 2013 #14

Schweitzer's been discussing running--it was posted here about a month ago: TwilightGardener Nov 2013 #17

It has to be someone capable of running the country pscot Nov 2013 #2

That's part of the problem. LWolf Nov 2013 #3

Exactly! n/t MuseRider Nov 2013 #6

I think more progressive candidates should be put up for elections. HappyMe Nov 2013 #7

That's how Republicans LWolf Nov 2013 #11

Exactly. HappyMe Nov 2013 #13

If you want authentic, positive change pscot Nov 2013 #15

Really. LWolf Nov 2013 #16

because she's high profile on the One issue that matters to a large number of Democrats magical thyme Nov 2013 #4

+1. n/t Laelth Nov 2013 #44

Because no one articulates economic populism as well as she does. lumberjack_jeff Nov 2013 #5

I would work my butt off.... daleanime Nov 2013 #8

But Sanders illustrates the futility pscot Nov 2013 #18

Huh? The only way we get a President Sanders...... daleanime Nov 2013 #19

I like Warren but even if she did run & became POTUS she'd be trashed within days/weeks KittyWampus Nov 2013 #9

I know I'd start trashing her as soon as ... Scuba Nov 2013 #10

touche LWolf Nov 2013 #12

Ouch! daleanime Nov 2013 #20

Ben Bernanke a) isnt part of the cabinet and b) .... scheming daemons Nov 2013 #27

+ ninety gazillion treestar Nov 2013 #35

Add Sheldon Whitehouse to the list Jim Lane Nov 2013 #21

Yes, Sherrod Brown, LWolf Nov 2013 #22

There are few progressive choices because the party weeds them out early. nt Demo_Chris Nov 2013 #23

This version of early is ridiculous. LWolf Nov 2013 #24

The party tries to weed them out long before they reach the national stage. nt Demo_Chris Nov 2013 #39

especially since she has no intention of running scheming daemons Nov 2013 #25

I don't think think the possible field of 2016 Dem candidates has actually been narrowed to two. winter is coming Nov 2013 #26

If they are "placeholders," LWolf Nov 2013 #28

So... you're complaining that the field has been prematurely narrowed, yet demanding that we know winter is coming Nov 2013 #29

No. LWolf Nov 2013 #40

"That leaves HRC" djean111 Nov 2013 #30

My complaint is that I think it's way too early to limit ourselves to the names we can think of. winter is coming Nov 2013 #37

I wouldn't LWolf Nov 2013 #41

I think the net should be cast more widely, too. djean111 Nov 2013 #45

Agreed. LWolf Nov 2013 #46

Don't forget Martin O'Malley and VP deBlasio JaneyVee Nov 2013 #31

Because fantasy is fun? She has already said she is not running. nt tridim Nov 2013 #32

The only people I see trying to "narrow the field"... 99Forever Nov 2013 #33

I'm more of an anybody but Hillary fan. Le Taz Hot Nov 2013 #34

I'm a former Californian, LWolf Nov 2013 #42

What about Jason Carter (Georgia)? ecstatic Nov 2013 #36

Tell me about him. LWolf Nov 2013 #43

we need several people running, telling us their plan for America rustydog Nov 2013 #38

She's the only advocate bluedeathray Nov 2013 #47

That WOULD be a dream ticket. LWolf Nov 2013 #48