View Poll Results: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary (Choose as many as you like)

Voters
22. You may not vote on this poll
  • Clinton

    8 36.36%
  • Warren

    10 45.45%
  • Webb

    13 59.09%
  • Sanders

    9 40.91%
  • Biden

    4 18.18%
  • O'Malley

    4 18.18%
  • Cuomo

    4 18.18%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 76

Thread: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

  1. #41
    Sage
    Glen Contrarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, here I am...
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    15,570

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors View Post
    I agree. So the fact that he has no chance, and his numbers are probably maxed out, makes it even more clear Warren is the only seriously contender currently on the stage. Her numbers have a lot of room to grow due to simple awareness, to say nothing of switching over, and she doesn't have the recent history that Biden does. Because what Warren does is stir up the base, dude. That's exactly her thing.

    It's just that, so far, the politically unaware haven't heard of her. Once they do, Hillary has a serious problem on her hands.

    Though if I were Warren, unless something colossal happens, I would wait for 2020. The Dem's chances are remote in 2016, simply due to America's tendency to decide they hate whatever party is in power right now and vote for the other one.

    Unless the Republicans totally screw Congress (and how much worse could it be screwed than what both parties have already done?), I think it's wiser for her to wait.
    If Hillary decided not to run, then Warren would stand a good chance to win the nomination in 2016. Problem is, she simply doesn't have the name recognition Hillary does, which means that the GOP would stand a chance of winning. And I think you're flat wrong when it comes to Hillary's chances in 2016 - she's going to break that glass ceiling.

    Assuming that Hillary does win in 2016, then (if Hillary stays healthy), Warren's going to have to wait until 2024.

    And can the Republicans win? Barring health problems or a total train wreck of a scandal against Hillary (and no, Benghazi won't help them), she's going to win. Personally I'd prefer Warren...but Hillary's a heck of a lot better than anyone from the GOP.
    To do evil, a human being must first of all believe that what hes doing is good" - Solzhenitsyn

    "...with the terrorists, you have to take out their families." - Donald Trump

  2. #42
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,177

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    You don't need passion to win these days. Just money. An unfortunate truth.
    Only if you're lucky and don't have anyone exciting running at all, either within your party or on the other side. I mean, Bush is the only recent president who didn't have much passion behind him, but look at the two stiffs he was running against. They could have been replaced with a cardboard replica. His stupidity was almost endearing, compared to the Ents running for the Democrats.

    Hey, I agree the Dems need to be more liberal if they are to win. I definitely don't disagree on that point. I've been saying it to anyone that would listen. That's why I, personally, rarely vote Democrat. I'd rather stick with the Greens or even the Libertarians. If I wanted to vote for Republicans I'd just vote in the real deal.

    Again, I don't disagree. But the Dems can't focus on just their liberal base. That would be dumb IMO. Get back to the left on economic policies absolutely, but don't just focus on pandering to the staunch liberals. Appealing to one base won't win an election.
    Yes it will. That's why the Republicans kick ass, dude.

    Most Americans are not very nuanced in their politics. They like the idea of swallowing a platform, no matter how nonsensical it might be when you look under the robe.

    And how did people vote on the ballots? Straight Democrat. Anti-gun, pro-choice, pro-worker benefits, etc, etc, etc...

    Not necessarily. His immigration stance is pretty ok, this is coming from someone who supports open borders. Secure the borders amd grant amnesty to those already here. It's reasonable and pragmatic.

    As for his guns stance? It's not exactly illiberal to support gun rights.
    In the Democratic party, yes it is.

    I agree with you on an ethical level, but that isn't how party politics work. Look at the ballots. Party politics are not ethically consistent.

    It's not just guns though, that's the point. Webb has an extremely strong record on both foreign policy and civil issues. His social issues also have quite a bit of appeal to libertarians. Webb would have the libertarian vote easy and wouldn't really need to alienate as many liberals as you seem to think to do it. You think Jeb Bush would do a better job at courting the libertarians? Chris Christie? Ted Cruz? Rick Perry? Fat chance! But Jim Webb, yeah he could do it.
    In the corrupted excuse we have for a libertarian party? YES! Any of them!

    We're not talking about what it should be, or what would be consistent, or what makes sense. We're talking about how people vote, and what these parties actually are.

    Almost none of us here on DP represent that. You don't represent Libertarians. I don't represent Democrats.

    In the general American sense, the Libertarian party is extremely pro-business, but they wouldn't even get to that point of contention with Webb, because they'd reject him the moment they saw the "D" by his name.

    Not all libertarians are fiscally on the right.
    Nope, but most of the party is.

    That is a valid concern for sure. But I think he could work something out. He's not the only Dem to have some past baggage on social issues.
    True. And the other one with a big suitcase that comes immediately to mind is Hillary.

  3. #43
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,177

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    If Hillary decided not to run, then Warren would stand a good chance to win the nomination in 2016. Problem is, she simply doesn't have the name recognition Hillary does, which means that the GOP would stand a chance of winning. And I think you're flat wrong when it comes to Hillary's chances in 2016 - she's going to break that glass ceiling.

    Assuming that Hillary does win in 2016, then (if Hillary stays healthy), Warren's going to have to wait until 2024.

    And can the Republicans win? Barring health problems or a total train wreck of a scandal against Hillary (and no, Benghazi won't help them), she's going to win. Personally I'd prefer Warren...but Hillary's a heck of a lot better than anyone from the GOP.
    I have 6 words for you.

    Obama versus McCain.

    Clinton versus Bush.

    Neither Obama nor Clinton was well-known... before they ran for president and mopped the floor with their celebrity-status Republican opponent. Dark horses do well for the Democrats.

  4. #44
    Sage
    Glen Contrarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, here I am...
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    15,570

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineTpartier View Post
    Biden has no chance IMO. The guy has said and will say too many stupid things to make it. I think he's entertaining personally but the media crucifies anyone that isn't spit and polished so severely that any one gaff takes a person totally out of the running. It'll be Clinton, even if it isn't enthusiastic. I don't think the Democratic Party is ready for the let down of 2016 personally. There is no Barack Obama around the corner that will stir up their base this time. He was a rare candidate in that he inspired a lot of people to vote that normally wouldn't. I don't think that will be repeated for a long time. By either party.
    If you don't think Hillary can stir up the base, you're greatly underestimating her. But the base of either party simply isn't enough in a presidential election, as the GOP simply doesn't seem to get. Hillary's greatest advantage...is the GOP's insistence on doing whatever it takes to piss off the minorities in its eternal quest to stir up its increasingly way-far-to-the-right-of-Goldwater base. As long as your politicians keep playing the "I'm-more-conservative-than-the-other-guy" circular firing squad game, the Dems will hold the White House.
    To do evil, a human being must first of all believe that what hes doing is good" - Solzhenitsyn

    "...with the terrorists, you have to take out their families." - Donald Trump

  5. #45
    Educator Starbuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-01-17 @ 11:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    881

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    So there is a pretty popular thread where posters are discussing their likely choices for a Republican nominee. Thought I'd start one for the Democrats. So, here we are. Who do you favor to win the 2016 Democratic primary?
    If the leadership of the Democratic party is doing any type of math, they would probably run a Clinton-Cuomo ticket. I haven't heard too much of Cuomo running, but a 2X term governor from New York would be a big boost to the ticket. Besides, governors usually make good executives.

    Either way, I'll vote for Gary Johnson if he runs again.

  6. #46
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,176

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    My list top 3.
    1.)Bernie Sanders
    2.)Elizabeth Warren
    3.)Joe Biden
    joe biden has the depth of gerald ford
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  7. #47
    Sage
    Glen Contrarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, here I am...
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    15,570

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors View Post
    I have 6 words for you.

    Obama versus McCain.

    Clinton versus Bush.

    Neither Obama nor Clinton was well-known... before they ran for president and mopped the floor with their celebrity-status Republican opponent. Dark horses do well for the Democrats.
    And the key is in your last seven words - "Dark horses do well for the Democrats." I don't ever remember the GOP having a dark horse candidate win a presidential election. Ever.

    And I don't think you have any realistic hopes of one on the horizon, either, thanks to the increasing polarization of the parties. Liberals by their very nature are more likely to listen to someone they've never heard of, even if that person looks and sounds differently, and even if they've got a funny name. Conservatives, OTOH, are less likely to do so, but are more likely to pay more attention to someone more familiar to them.

    I know that may sound offensive to you, but it's not meant to be offensive...and both ways certainly have their advantages and disadvantages. But the above is why dark horse candidates do well for the Dems...and not so much for the GOP.
    To do evil, a human being must first of all believe that what hes doing is good" - Solzhenitsyn

    "...with the terrorists, you have to take out their families." - Donald Trump

  8. #48
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuck View Post
    If the leadership of the Democratic party is doing any type of math, they would probably run a Clinton-Cuomo ticket. I haven't heard too much of Cuomo running, but a 2X term governor from New York would be a big boost to the ticket. Besides, governors usually make good executives.

    Either way, I'll vote for Gary Johnson if he runs again.
    The leadership of the Democratic party doesn't pick the candidates, voters in the various primaries do. + I don't very many democrats are aching to vote for Cuomo.


  9. #49
    Haters gon' hate
    MarineTpartier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    01-04-16 @ 04:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,586
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors View Post
    I agree. So the fact that he has no chance, and his numbers are probably maxed out, makes it even more clear Warren is the only seriously contender currently on the stage. Her numbers have a lot of room to grow due to simple awareness, to say nothing of switching over, and she doesn't have the recent history that Biden does. Because what Warren does is stir up the base, dude. That's exactly her thing.

    It's just that, so far, the politically unaware haven't heard of her. Once they do, Hillary has a serious problem on her hands.

    Though if I were Warren, unless something colossal happens, I would wait for 2020. The Dem's chances are remote in 2016, simply due to America's tendency to decide they hate whatever party is in power right now and vote for the other one.

    Unless the Republicans totally screw Congress (and how much worse could it be screwed than what both parties have already done?), I think it's wiser for her to wait.
    She would definitely be the front runner for the Democratic Party in 2020. I agree with you on that.
    Mr. Speaker, I once again find myself compelled to vote against the annual budget resolution for a very simple reason: it makes government bigger. ― Ron Paul
    Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty. Thomas Jefferson

  10. #50
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ask the NSA
    Last Seen
    07-24-16 @ 01:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    5,849
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors View Post
    Only if you're lucky and don't have anyone exciting running at all, either within your party or on the other side. I mean, Bush is the only recent president who didn't have much passion behind him, but look at the two stiffs he was running against. They could have been replaced with a cardboard replica. His stupidity was almost endearing, compared to the Ents running for the Democrats.
    Money is a big player in American politics. I wish I had your optimism, and I do hope you prove me wrong, but I see a Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton race in our future. Unfortunately.

    Yes it will. That's why the Republicans kick ass, dude.
    If you recall, Republicans were on the edge of becoming totally irrelevant. Why? Because it was the same pandering to the old straight white men year after year. The only reason they won in 2014 was because they were riding an anti-Obama wave. Any other time and they would have gotten their asses handed to them like they always do.

    Likewise, while it's important the Democrats start appealing to their own again, focusing only on their liberal base will do the same. As perotista pointed out, neither party base is large enough to ride into the white house alone. I think a balance in between the two extremes (on one extreme going Republican lite and on the other extreme becoming isolated) would be ideal for the party.

    Most Americans are not very nuanced in their politics. They like the idea of swallowing a platform, no matter how nonsensical it might be when you look under the robe.
    Most Americans are independent.

    In the Democratic party, yes it is.
    There are plenty of pro-gun Democrats.

    In the corrupted excuse we have for a libertarian party? YES! Any of them!
    I think you're confusing Libertarians with the lame ass embrassed Republicans like Rand Paul and such.

    Almost none of us here on DP represent that. You don't represent Libertarians. I don't represent Democrats.
    If only!

    In the general American sense, the Libertarian party is extremely pro-business,
    As much as I vehemently disagree with the LP on economics, I do have to say that they are pro-market not pro-business. They consistently hold positions that are general thought to be unfavorable to business. Legalizing drugs (bye bye big pharma and prison industrial complex), ending wars overseas(definitely not a favorable position to big weapons manufacturers and oil companies), ending all corporate welfare, ending the bank bailouts, stimuluses, etc. I definitely don't like the idea of (unfettered) free markets, I feel like that would send income inequality way up through the roof, but the LP definitely not pro-business in the sense that the term is commonly used by Republicans and business conservatives.

    Anyway, I was more talking about left-libertarians. To use DP posters as examples: Myself, Kobie, fedup, DocileLion, Era, ikari, taco (he doesn't have the lean displayed, but he has expressed sympathies with left-libertarianism before), so on and so forth. None of the posters I just mentioned are a part of the Democratic Party but likely all would be with a few tweaks on civil policy, social policy, and foreign policy. Along with a sharp shove back to the left on economics. A tweak like, well, Jim Webb.

    but they wouldn't even get to that point of contention with Webb, because they'd reject him the moment they saw the "D" by his name.
    Not really true. Obama got a fair amount of libertarian support in '08, especially since the Libertarian nominee was absolute crap.

    Nope, but most of the party is.
    But I'm not talking about courting the party, I'm just talking about courting "small l" libertarians. The party probably won't budge no matter what you do. As a member of the party myself (yeah, I know, but I hold my nose on the economics so I can get the social issues/civil issues/foreign policy) I have seen how dedicated they are to making the LP a major party. So it doesn't really matter who you put up. The independent libertarians, however, are easy snags if you push the civil liberties, social freedoms, and the anti-war policies.
    Last edited by TeleKat; 11-28-14 at 10:36 PM.

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •