Who is most likely to win the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination? (Jan 2017)

[JA]

At this point, the two most likely potential candidates to become the nominee are Cory Booker and Elizabeth Warren. If it's booker, or another corporate Democrat, I can't say I'll vote for them, despite my strong party loyalty and disdain for Trump.

[JA]

At this point, the two most likely potential candidates to become the nominee are Cory Booker and Elizabeth Warren. If it's booker, or another corporate Democrat, I can't say I'll vote for them, despite my strong party loyalty and disdain for Trump.

I totally get why Booker is bad, but why is he so bad that you'd let Trump win over him?

I already voted for one disappointing Democrat, why should I vote for another one? Perhaps if the party realizes corporate candidates will depress turnout among the party's base, they'll stop nominating them.

[JA]

At this point, the two most likely potential candidates to become the nominee are Cory Booker and Elizabeth Warren. If it's booker, or another corporate Democrat, I can't say I'll vote for them, despite my strong party loyalty and disdain for Trump.

I totally get why Booker is bad, but why is he so bad that you'd let Trump win over him?

I already voted for one disappointing Democrat, why should I vote for another one? Perhaps if the party realizes corporate candidates will depress turnout among the party's base, they'll stop nominating them.

I think stopping Trump is a bigger priority than the ideological purity of the replacement.

I'm not an ideological purist. I'm certainly willing to compromise on many issues. However, being so aligned with Wall Street and corporate interests is not one of them. If that means a second Trump term, as absolutely horrible as that is, then so be it.

[JA]

At this point, the two most likely potential candidates to become the nominee are Cory Booker and Elizabeth Warren. If it's booker, or another corporate Democrat, I can't say I'll vote for them, despite my strong party loyalty and disdain for Trump.

I totally get why Booker is bad, but why is he so bad that you'd let Trump win over him?

I already voted for one disappointing Democrat, why should I vote for another one? Perhaps if the party realizes corporate candidates will depress turnout among the party's base, they'll stop nominating them.

I think stopping Trump is a bigger priority than the ideological purity of the replacement.

I'm not an ideological purist. I'm certainly willing to compromise on many issues. However, being so aligned with Wall Street and corporate interests is not one of them. If that means a second Trump term, as absolutely horrible as that is, then so be it.

But isn't Trump also aligned with corporate interests? Look at his cabinet. Booker is vastly preferable to Trump on other issues, even if he's terrible on economics.

I'm not suggesting that Booker is equal to or worse than Trump, nor am I saying that I disagree with him on all or perhaps even most issues. What I am saying is that, regardless of the outcome, I won't again vote for a candidate closely aligned with Wall Street and corporate interests - period.

[JA]

At this point, the two most likely potential candidates to become the nominee are Cory Booker and Elizabeth Warren. If it's booker, or another corporate Democrat, I can't say I'll vote for them, despite my strong party loyalty and disdain for Trump.

I totally get why Booker is bad, but why is he so bad that you'd let Trump win over him?

I already voted for one disappointing Democrat, why should I vote for another one? Perhaps if the party realizes corporate candidates will depress turnout among the party's base, they'll stop nominating them.

I think stopping Trump is a bigger priority than the ideological purity of the replacement.

But that's what the message was from Democrats in 2016, and look where that got them.

But he's asking about a hypothetical in which Booker has already won the nomination.  If Booker and Trump are the respective nominees, and you agree with Booker on many more issues than Trump, then why not vote for Booker?

Because apparently there's a limit to the number of "corporate Democrats" that one can vote for in one's lifetime.

Yes, there is a limit. Even 1 exceeds it.

[JA]

At this point, the two most likely potential candidates to become the nominee are Cory Booker and Elizabeth Warren. If it's booker, or another corporate Democrat, I can't say I'll vote for them, despite my strong party loyalty and disdain for Trump.

I totally get why Booker is bad, but why is he so bad that you'd let Trump win over him?

I already voted for one disappointing Democrat, why should I vote for another one? Perhaps if the party realizes corporate candidates will depress turnout among the party's base, they'll stop nominating them.

I think stopping Trump is a bigger priority than the ideological purity of the replacement.

But that's what the message was from Democrats in 2016, and look where that got them.

But he's asking about a hypothetical in which Booker has already won the nomination.  If Booker and Trump are the respective nominees, and you agree with Booker on many more issues than Trump, then why not vote for Booker?

Because apparently there's a limit to the number of "corporate Democrats" that one can vote for in one's lifetime.

Yes, there is a limit. Even 1 exceeds it.

Why?

It should be self-explanatory, but I abhor the practices of Wall Street, large corporations, and capital interests, and any candidate who's cozy with these enemies of the American people shouldn't be anywhere near an office of power.