Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 30, 2014, 09:14:45 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  2016 U.S. Presidential Election (Moderators: Mr. Morden, Bacon King, Sheriff Buford TX Justice)
| | |-+  Another 2016 Hypothetical Democratic Matchup
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Poll
Question: Who would you vote for in the Democratic Primary?
Senator Mark Warner (VA)   -3 (5.9%)
Governor Martin O'Malley (MD)   -10 (19.6%)
Governor Andrew Cuomo (NY)   -7 (13.7%)
Former Senator Hillary Clinton (NY)   -9 (17.6%)
Governor Brian Schweitzer (MT)   -13 (25.5%)
Governor Deval Patrick (MA)   -0 (0%)
Senator Elizabeth Warren (MA)   -7 (13.7%)
Vice President Joe Biden (DE)   -2 (3.9%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 51

Author Topic: Another 2016 Hypothetical Democratic Matchup  (Read 1607 times)
TheresNoMoney
Scoonie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7938


Political Matrix
E: -3.25, S: -2.72

View Profile
« on: February 28, 2012, 04:49:32 pm »
Ignore

Many of these 8 candidates are likely to run for president in 2016. If the election were today, who would you vote for?
Logged

E: -3.25
S: -2.72

On the GOP side, for 2016, look out for Gov. Phill Kline (KS), Gov. Ralph Reed (GA), Gov. JD Hayworth (AZ), Sen. David Vitter (LA), among others.
Psychic Octopus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9171
United States


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: February 28, 2012, 09:42:03 pm »
Ignore

It's funny, but I could see many of these people as top contenders. I'm not sure about Warner, though. I'm not sure if he could break out in the field. I'm going to discount Biden, Clinton, and Patrick in this scenario, purely because it makes it easier, and because I doubt they'll run. Anyway, I doubt they could hold a candle to the rest.

I would guess that the main battle would be between Cuomo, Schweitzer, and Warren. Warren would probably be the choice of the progressives, while Schweitzer would probably be a favorite of the Mountain West/heartland. I could see a lot of Democrats getting excited about a Schweitzer candidacy. Cuomo would probably be the favorite of the combine, and have Wall Street behind him.

So, really, I don't know who would win. It'd be fun to speculate, though. I think Schweitzer would win Iowa.

Schweitzer, really, is probably the Democrats' best choice. I'd have a hard time trying to think of a reason to vote against him. Pro-energy enrichment, pro-gun, skeptical of overseas conflict, pragmatic. He would have tremendous appeal in Red States. Tremendous. Not because of his policies, but because of his folksy demeanor. He could definitely connect with voters. Other than that, Republicans would have a hard time trying to label the public school-educated farmer as "out-of-touch" or "wrong for America," while they would easily do so with other Democrats:

Cuomo: Corrupt NYC liberal hostile to American values. The product of a dynasty. A son of privilege. The ultimate insider. Do you really want this man running your country?
Warren: Elitist Ivy League professor. Too feminist. She doesn't care about you.

And so on. So my vote would be for Schweitzer. For god's sake, the man uses a branding iron to veto bills. How badass is that?
« Last Edit: February 28, 2012, 09:44:20 pm by Blackwater NiK »Logged

Frodo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13460
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: February 28, 2012, 11:24:24 pm »
Ignore

It's funny, but I could see many of these people as top contenders. I'm not sure about Warner, though. I'm not sure if he could break out in the field. I'm going to discount Biden, Clinton, and Patrick in this scenario, purely because it makes it easier, and because I doubt they'll run. Anyway, I doubt they could hold a candle to the rest.

I would guess that the main battle would be between Cuomo, Schweitzer, and Warren. Warren would probably be the choice of the progressives, while Schweitzer would probably be a favorite of the Mountain West/heartland. I could see a lot of Democrats getting excited about a Schweitzer candidacy. Cuomo would probably be the favorite of the combine, and have Wall Street behind him.

So, really, I don't know who would win. It'd be fun to speculate, though. I think Schweitzer would win Iowa.

Schweitzer, really, is probably the Democrats' best choice. I'd have a hard time trying to think of a reason to vote against him. Pro-energy enrichment, pro-gun, skeptical of overseas conflict, pragmatic. He would have tremendous appeal in Red States. Tremendous. Not because of his policies, but because of his folksy demeanor. He could definitely connect with voters. Other than that, Republicans would have a hard time trying to label the public school-educated farmer as "out-of-touch" or "wrong for America," while they would easily do so with other Democrats:

Cuomo: Corrupt NYC liberal hostile to American values. The product of a dynasty. A son of privilege. The ultimate insider. Do you really want this man running your country?
Warren: Elitist Ivy League professor. Too feminist. She doesn't care about you.

And so on. So my vote would be for Schweitzer. For god's sake, the man uses a branding iron to veto bills. How badass is that?

And what are your thoughts on O'Malley, the one candidate you haven't mentioned here?
Logged

greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2546


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #3 on: February 28, 2012, 11:39:13 pm »
Ignore

Based on what I know of the candidates and their positions on the issues so far I would say O'Malley
Logged
Psychic Octopus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9171
United States


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: February 28, 2012, 11:55:10 pm »
Ignore

It's funny, but I could see many of these people as top contenders. I'm not sure about Warner, though. I'm not sure if he could break out in the field. I'm going to discount Biden, Clinton, and Patrick in this scenario, purely because it makes it easier, and because I doubt they'll run. Anyway, I doubt they could hold a candle to the rest.

I would guess that the main battle would be between Cuomo, Schweitzer, and Warren. Warren would probably be the choice of the progressives, while Schweitzer would probably be a favorite of the Mountain West/heartland. I could see a lot of Democrats getting excited about a Schweitzer candidacy. Cuomo would probably be the favorite of the combine, and have Wall Street behind him.

So, really, I don't know who would win. It'd be fun to speculate, though. I think Schweitzer would win Iowa.

Schweitzer, really, is probably the Democrats' best choice. I'd have a hard time trying to think of a reason to vote against him. Pro-energy enrichment, pro-gun, skeptical of overseas conflict, pragmatic. He would have tremendous appeal in Red States. Tremendous. Not because of his policies, but because of his folksy demeanor. He could definitely connect with voters. Other than that, Republicans would have a hard time trying to label the public school-educated farmer as "out-of-touch" or "wrong for America," while they would easily do so with other Democrats:

Cuomo: Corrupt NYC liberal hostile to American values. The product of a dynasty. A son of privilege. The ultimate insider. Do you really want this man running your country?
Warren: Elitist Ivy League professor. Too feminist. She doesn't care about you.

And so on. So my vote would be for Schweitzer. For god's sake, the man uses a branding iron to veto bills. How badass is that?

And what are your thoughts on O'Malley, the one candidate you haven't mentioned here?

Ah, he slipped my mind. I think he would be a good, solid candidate for the Democrats, and in line with the base. As I recall, he's had a fairly successful term as Governor, and has some fairly achievements under his belt (gay marriage, Compstat), as well as propositions to close the budget deficit. Playing guitar will probably increase his appeal. I see him competing with Cuomo and Warren in many respects, though Cuomo will have the advantage of big money, and Warren (if she runs, and, let's assume she does) is more endearing to the Democratic base, I think. I get the feeling the O'Malley would play well with women nationwide, though I'm not really familiar with his base in Maryland. I see him as a notch below the "big three" in this scenario, though that might change. I have no idea how much exposure Cuomo's more moderate policies will get in Democratic circles. I think that he'll be a favorite of the Wall Street and media establishment, though. Especially if he has a big ol' wedding to his girlfriend over the next three years.

However, I see a few weaknesses for the general election that the Republicans will pound on. For one, he plans to raise taxes on couples making more than 150K, and plans to apply the state tax to gasoline. Depending on how high prices are, the GOP would be able to make note of that frequently, and claim (though dubiously) that he would plan to do so nationwide. So, in all, I think that makes him a slightly weaker candidate than Schweitzer. But not by any means unelectable. Not by any means at all.

Now, on the GOP hatred scale, I would suspect that of these four, this is how it would work, from most hated to least hated.

1. Warren (there's no disputing this, really. If she wins, she'll have knocked off a Republican folk hero, and is a Harvard academic. Republicans would hate her. Hate her. On a level equal, if not greater than, Obama).

2. Cuomo ("Lamestream" media will favor him, Republicans will tar him as a big government man wanting to run your life).

3. O'Malley (Truthfully, I'm not sure what the reaction would be, but I doubt it will be substantially worse than your standard Democratic politician. Might have good relations with Congress, actually).

4. Schweitzer (I see no truly effective way for Republicans to tar him at this point. He's a farmer who speaks Arabic, is folksy, doesn't run around with women, and has a Cowboy-style image.  It'd be hard, to say the least.)
Logged

Carlos Danger
wormyguy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8404
Liechtenstein


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: February 29, 2012, 12:24:45 am »
Ignore

Elizabeth Warren would be an absolute disaster for Democrats.  Ultra-liberal college professor from Massachusetts, second-wave feminist, open class warrior (while being a multi-millionaire), gun-grabber, hostile to Christianity, has a cutesy, condescending speaking style which irritates people.

She's the negative stereotype that not just Republicans but swing voters have of liberals.  She's a walking caricature.  She's a Mallard Fillmore character, with the pretentiousness of an Ayn Rand villain.  The Democrats would do better to renominate Walter Mondale than her (and his loss would look like a nail-biter compared to hers, unless unemployment is really at 4% and rainbows are flying out everyone's asses).

I don't particularly dislike Elizabeth Warren, just my mostly-objective advice freely offered.
« Last Edit: February 29, 2012, 12:32:11 am by Those Who Own the Country Ought to Govern It. »Logged

Psychic Octopus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9171
United States


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: February 29, 2012, 03:38:01 am »
Ignore

I agree, Wormy. She'd be less experienced than Obama and more polarizing from the get-go. Dems love her, though, so if she runs I wouldn't rule out a nomination... even though such a nomination would favor the Republicans.

I don't discount the 2016 Dem field, but I'm pretty sure Cuomo and Warren would be underdogs.
Logged

TheresNoMoney
Scoonie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7938


Political Matrix
E: -3.25, S: -2.72

View Profile
« Reply #7 on: February 29, 2012, 11:36:09 am »
Ignore

I honestly don't think Warren will even run, but there has already been some speculation I wanted to include another woman on the list. I assume there will be at least one woman who runs. Besides Clinton, I could see Kathleen Sebelius or Christine Gregoire possibly running.

I know that if Clinton decides to run, she probably wins. Cuomo probably would decline a bid rather than go up against her.
Logged

E: -3.25
S: -2.72

On the GOP side, for 2016, look out for Gov. Phill Kline (KS), Gov. Ralph Reed (GA), Gov. JD Hayworth (AZ), Sen. David Vitter (LA), among others.
Comrade Funk
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 637
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.55, S: -6.96

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #8 on: February 29, 2012, 05:58:14 pm »
Ignore

Schweitzer or O'Malley. Cuomo is much worse than his father.
Logged

We need a public option

Quote from: President Harry S. Truman
“We should resolve now that the health of this nation is a national concern; that financial barriers in the way of attaining health shall be removed
Pictor Ignotus
TCash101
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6434


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: February 29, 2012, 08:02:56 pm »
Ignore

Clinton
Logged

Renew our Democracy!
Nagas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1676
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: -7.65

View Profile
« Reply #10 on: February 29, 2012, 08:44:36 pm »
Ignore

Torn between Cuomo and Schweitzer. Both are pragmatic and successful governors.
Logged

Chris B
cb48026
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 686


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: March 02, 2012, 04:50:18 pm »
Ignore

I voted for Schweitzer as he couldn't be painted as your stereotypical Democrat by the Republicans. 

Though O'Malley and Warren would be worthy of consideration.
Logged
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5298
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: March 02, 2012, 08:05:47 pm »
Ignore

I'd prefer Warren, but Schweitzer would be very hard to beat in a general, and is also a very impressive man, whereas some of the others wouldn't. So, if the primary wasn't over, I'd probably go Schweitzer.
Logged
Indy Texas
independentTX
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4632
Virgin Islands, U.S.


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: -3.48

View Profile
« Reply #13 on: March 02, 2012, 11:36:46 pm »
Ignore

I don't understand Brian Schweitzer's draw other than that it's hard for the conservative commentariat to paint a Montana farmer in jeans and a bolo tie as an effete liberal elitist. How is being Governor of Montana any better preparation for the White House than being governor of...say...Alaska?
Logged

Cobbler
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 811
United States


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: March 03, 2012, 07:24:38 am »
Ignore

I would vote for Schweitzer or Cuomo. Both are very pragmatic governors that have crossover appeal. Schweitzer is a politician that one can feel like they can trust, and is a different kind of Democrat. The folksy personality and various centrist stances help too. Cuomo has also been a very centrist governor, and would make an excellent president as well.

And I feel like those two are the most electable after 8 years of a Democratic presidency. But I might be looking like a fool in a few years, so we'll see.
Logged


Quote
Economic score: +2.19
Social score: -5.74
Vosem
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5169
United States


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: March 03, 2012, 10:26:44 pm »
Ignore

The 2016 Democratic field is really impressive. I could see myself voting for H. Clinton, Schweitzer, or Cuomo, and, if their opponents are really horrible, Warner or Biden; but in 2012 I'm stuck voting for Gary Johnson if Mitt Pathetic-But-I'm-Supporting-Him-Anyway Romney doesn't get the nomination.
Logged

I apologize for being so adamantly right.
LastVoter
seatown
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4466
Thailand


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: March 04, 2012, 05:17:05 pm »
Ignore

Warren, would be the best choice. But If we are talking about seriously winning 2016 and actually accomplishing something than Schweitzer. He is probably best risk vs reward/strategical vote. He might have some conservative stances(gun control) , but advocates Universal Single-payer healthcare, so he might be he is acceptable to real left-wingers(not liberals), also hard for Republicans to smear him. O'malley and Cuomo are Obama and Clinton style moderate heroes, while they might please liberals to certain extent but would be bad choices.
Logged
I'm JewCon in name only.
Klecly
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 923
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.61, S: 6.52

View Profile
« Reply #17 on: March 05, 2012, 09:03:53 pm »
Ignore

Cuomo, easily.
Logged

A.G. Snowstalker
Snowstalker
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17293


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: March 15, 2012, 02:38:08 pm »
Ignore

Andrew Cuomo would be the most conservative Democratic nominee since John Davis.
Logged

HST1948
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 537


Political Matrix
E: -4.97, S: -5.30

P

View Profile
« Reply #19 on: March 15, 2012, 03:07:25 pm »
Ignore

Ranked
Hillary Clinton    
Andrew Cuomo    
Martin O'Malley    
Brian Schweitzer     
Deval Patrick         
Mark Warner 
Vice President Joe Biden
Elizabeth Warren

Hillary would be my absolute first choice, but I doubt she would run.  Cuomo would be my second.  After that O'Malley, Schweitzer, and Patrick are all pretty much tied.  I think Schweitzer would make a good candidate from a geographical and electability standpoint, even though I don't agree with him on some issues. Elizabeth Warren would be an absolute disaster for the Democrats... the electoral map would look like 1972 with her at the head of the ticket.  Even if we are definitely going to lose in 2016 I don't want to be embarrassed with a landslide like that.     
Logged



"I believe we can keep the promise of our founders, the idea that if you’re willing to work hard, it doesn’t matter who you are or where you come from or what you look like or where you love. It doesn’t matter whether you’re black or white or Hispanic or Asian or Native American or young or old or rich or poor, able, disabled, gay or straight, you can make it here in America if you’re willing to try.
-Obama
politicus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3723
Denmark


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: March 15, 2012, 07:36:28 pm »
Ignore

Schweitzer (if I could vote). A surprisingly liberal guy that doesn't look and talk like the stereotypical liberal. Their only real chance of keeping the presidency after 8 years with Obama and a good contrast to Romney if he is the incumbent president.
Logged

Every time I see Denmark I just want to punch it in the face...
Bluegrassball
Rookie
*
Posts: 33


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: March 15, 2012, 07:40:50 pm »
Ignore

I don't understand Brian Schweitzer's draw other than that it's hard for the conservative commentariat to paint a Montana farmer in jeans and a bolo tie as an effete liberal elitist. How is being Governor of Montana any better preparation for the White House than being governor of...say...Alaska?

Probably about as well as being governor of Arkansas prepares you. Plus he will be term limited in 2012 and will have four years to pad his resume--possibly a cabinet position.
Logged
Sasquatch
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 805
View Profile
« Reply #22 on: March 16, 2012, 03:31:18 pm »
Ignore

Out of those listed, I'd vote for Elizabeth Warren.
Logged
Zioneer
PioneerProgress
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3857
United States


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: March 18, 2012, 10:53:43 pm »
Ignore

Brian Schweitzer, because of what Blackwater NiK said, and because he's probably one of the most cunning politicians the Mountain West has seen for a generation. For goodness sakes, the man is a Democrat with some incredibly liberal positions in ruby-red Montana, and has the highest gubernatorial approval rating in the country!
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines