One of the major criticisms of the Democratic party this year was that Hillary Clinton was pretty much anointed as the "presumptive" nominee years ago, certainly after 2012, maybe after 2008, despite her weaknesses. Thought experiment: Suppose Hillary had announced early that one presidential campaign was enough, and she wouldn't run in 2016. Who would have filled the vacuum? I'm pretty sure Andrew Cuomo, Kirsten Gillibrand and Chuck Schumer from New York would all have considered it. Sanders, who basically ran as an alternative to Hillary, might have stayed out. Maybe Joe Biden would have gotten a campaign underway before his son died. Maybe Mark Warner. Maybe Richard Blumenthal. Maybe Maria Cantwell. Maybe John Hickelooper. Maybe Tim Kaine. If Clinton had never run, who would the Democratic nominee likely have been? And would he/she -- without Hillary's baggage -- have beaten Trump?
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
If not Hillary, who?
- Thread starter Bob001
- Start date
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
Barack Obama would have beaten Trump. And that's really the way it should it have happened: Obama should have stayed in the Senate for at least a full term. Hillary should have campaigned and won against McCain and Romney. And in 2016 Barack Obama should have stepped forward to save the nation from Donald Trump.
What you're proposing is the Democratic version of the GOP "clown car" that lost the election to Trump. But perhaps *any* of them would have beaten Trump, simply because none of them were as widely hated as Hillary Clinton. Just not having the email server would probably have put them over the top in the general election.
What you're proposing is the Democratic version of the GOP "clown car" that lost the election to Trump. But perhaps *any* of them would have beaten Trump, simply because none of them were as widely hated as Hillary Clinton. Just not having the email server would probably have put them over the top in the general election.
ChrisBFRPKY
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2012
- Messages
- 4,449
Chuck Schumer.
Hell of a lot better choice than any you listed.
Chris B.
Hell of a lot better choice than any you listed.
Chris B.
Read my list again.
I don't think you can realistically look back that far. There's no telling what would have come up during a two-term Clinton administration that Republicans could have run against, or what kind of record Obama might have established (or not) in the Senate. You can't even be sure that Trump would have run. And I don't think there would have been a Democratic "clown car." All the people I named are senators and governors with generally good reputations; no Trump, no Carson, no Fiorina, etc.
Slings and Arrows
Graduate Poster
It's too late to pick a better candidate for 2016. But for the upcoming 2020 election, the Democrats have a strong bench to draw from. Here is their current all star lineup -- anyone of them would be an improvement over Hillary:
Nancy Pelosi
Maxine Waters
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz
Chuck Schumer
Harry Reid
Al Gore
Joe Biden
Anthony Weiner
Chelsea Clinton
Tim Kaine
Elizabeth "Fauxcahontas" Warren
Maxine Waters
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz
Chuck Schumer
Harry Reid
Al Gore
Joe Biden
Anthony Weiner
Chelsea Clinton
Tim Kaine
Elizabeth "Fauxcahontas" Warren
Last edited:
ChrisBFRPKY
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2012
- Messages
- 4,449
Sorry, my bad. I must have missed it? Thanks, Chris B.
Dumb All Over
A Little Ugly on the Side
Had Hillary Clinton not been her anointed self, Joe Biden would have been the Democrat nominee. Trump would have beaten him, too.
Last edited:
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
I really don't understand this perception of her. Could you elaborate?
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
Maybe, maybe not.
He does have stronger ties to Obama (and thus the republicans might label him as "Obama Jr." and suggest" Obama is a failure so Biden will be a failure".) But on the other hand, I can't think of many scandals or smears that Biden has been involved in (nothing with the footprint of Bengazi or Clinton's private email servers.) I'm sure the Republicans would manufacture some scandals, but they may not capture as much attention since they'd be relatively new.
And while perhaps he may get less support among women, that may be offset by increased support from men who just couldn't vote for a woman.
Dumb All Over
A Little Ugly on the Side
There isn't much to understand. I was using the description presented in the OP. If you need further elaboration, ask Bob001.
If you don't get it by now you never will.
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
Dumb All Over
A Little Ugly on the Side
Most certainly.
Well, yes. That is one extremely viable way for Trump to defeat Biden. The dissatisfaction of the American electorate with the Obama administration is palpable. One need not add extra strategies like scandals and smears to defeat Biden. Those strategies could have been kept in reserve an pulled out on an as needed, emergency basis only. Otherwise, Biden would have been easier to defeat than Clinton.
Dumb All Over
A Little Ugly on the Side
I have no idea if Bob001 can elaborate or if he cannot elaborate. Why don't you ask Bob001?
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
(Duplicate post... got a 'bad gateway' error for some reason.)
Last edited:
What needs elaboration? Democratic leadership selected Clinton as their candidate years before the election, and both the leadership and Clinton "machine" discouraged other candidates from running. Bernie Sanders was disparaged as an interloper who was just getting in Clinton's way. If Clinton hadn't run, other, stronger candidates would have emerged.
Last edited:
You can't be sure it would have been Biden. He would still have had the same family issues that kept him out. And if it had been Biden, there's no reason to think he wouldn't have picked up all of Clinton's votes, and a big percentage of votes from people who held their nose and voted for Trump because they couldn't stand Clinton. Biden grew up working class, is an observant Catholic and is an undisputedly devoted family man, enhancing his appeal to multiple groups who faulted Clinton in those areas. He's never been associated with any financial scandals, and in fact he was one of the poorest Senators. He's also a skilled political operator with six Senate victories. And of course, he didn't have a billion-dollar foundation or a private email server to explain. He would have made Trump look like a howling mutt.
Last edited:
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 26, 2006
- Messages
- 22,325
That is a pretty sad commentary on the state of the Democrats right now. Pelosi, Reid and Waters will all be 80+ in 2020. Biden looks like a youngster compared to them, but he will be 77, while Gore will be 72. Even Warren will be on the north side of 70.
Donal
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2006
- Messages
- 9,372
More of a commentary of how under informed the two of you are.