Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am a political junkie and have been hoping for a more competitive Democratic field for next year's election. For those who hope Hillary will have a challenger, I hope everyone now realizes that Elizabeth Warren is not running (nor should she run, because she is inexperienced in all aspects aside from Wall Street-based reform). Warren would be better suited either in the Senate or maybe in the Clinton administration.
Anyway, who do you guys think could be the strongest candidate that is not being highlighted in the media?
I think Senator Klobuchar (while not the strongest overall candidate) is an underrated one in the 2016 conversation. She is a part of the Farmer-Labor branch of the Democratic party (so, she would have a populist edge to her). She seems to have a friendly demeanor and is not terribly polarizing for standing with the left-of-center Farmer-Labor. She is also known for working across the aisle.
Overall, she is not tied to Wall Street. She is liberal, not a hawk, yet known to compromise. She is relatable, down-to-earth and seems genuine. She is ambitious. She would be more electable than Warren, because she is not as confrontational and divisive in tone/demeanor.
I know Klobuchar has put support behind Hillary, but why aren't more Democrats pushing for her to run? And who should they be encouraging to run against Hillary instead?
Elizabeth Warren - one of the few politicians not owned by lobbyists
Jerry Brown - Governor of California - is turning the state & it's finances around
Martin O'Malley - ex Governor of Maryland - being attacked by the Clinton machine for saying "The presidency of the United States is not some crown to be passed between two families"
Elizabeth Warren - one of the few politicians not owned by lobbyists
Jerry Brown - Governor of California - is turning the state & it's finances around
Martin O'Malley - ex Governor of Maryland - being attacked by the Clinton machine for saying "The presidency of the United States is not some crown to be passed between two families"
I am liking O'Malley just for making that comment because that was one of the reasons I didn't vote for Hillary in 2008.
None of those clowns has any business anywhere near the White House. Didn't you liberals learn anything from the failed Obama Presidency?
Experience is necessary but overrated for the presidency. It isn't a technocratic position. The most prepared resume we had in POTUS since Eisenhower was GHWB and he was a relative failure to be honest. Even he realized his huge deficiency, which in his words was '...that vision thing'.
I bet that not one in 1000 outside of MN has heard of her, and she wants to change that. She does have a good CV (Yale w/ honors, and University of Chicago law school).
My initial post was not asking if Klobuchar was running, because I think it is clear that she will wait until after 2016. My main question was why aren't Democrats pushing her to run? She is liberal, a populist, down-to-earth personality, known to compromise/not divisive, and she is not a hawk. All of those qualities are aspects that Hillary is lacking.
I'm sure the common response will be that Klobuchar would have a hard time winning, but I think Elizabeth Warren would have a difficult time winning as well (and that sure hasn't stopped people from urging her to run).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.