Do you ethusiastically support any candidate at this stage?

[Mister Mets]

I really like Paul Ryan, although it's certainly possible he won't run.

[Never]

Rand Paul and Scott Walker. Other than that, no one would really inspire me.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Bernie Sanders

[IceSpear]

I'm kind of jaded from 2008.  I thought Obama would be a transformational political figure because he had a unique vision and personal story.  He hasn't been that figure.  That's not to say I fault Obama for that failure.  I'm disappointed in the American political system, not Obama. 

This time around, I don't want a transformational figure.  I want the consummate Washington insider.  I want a cold-blooded, experienced operator who can govern with personal favors and malice for our corrupt, annoying system. 

In other words, I'm ready for Hillary. 

I wholeheartedly agree with this.

[Fritz]

I was for Hillary in 2008, and still am.

[Averroës Nix]

I'm as ready for Hillary as I am for a root canal.

[TJ in Oregon]

Not really. Political enthusiasm is a hard thing for me to come by these days. I suppose either of the two Cheesehead Republicans would be the closest to inspiring for me.

[Joe Biden 2020]

I still support Chris Christie, but I'm not over exuberant about him.  I voted no in the poll.

[Kushahontas]

Warren

[Donerail]

Whoever is eventually anointed as the anti-Hillary.

[IceSpear]

Whoever is eventually anointed as the anti-Hillary.

Which will probably be someone like Jim Rogers, Darcy Richardson, or Lyndon LaRouche.

[Rockefeller GOP]

Still Chris Christie.

[Donerail]

Whoever is eventually anointed as the anti-Hillary.

Which will probably be someone like Jim Rogers, Darcy Richardson, or Lyndon LaRouche.

There'll be somebody - Schweitzer, O'Malley, Dean, Sanders, maybe Biden. If I'm wrong, then I guess the forum will have gained its first Richardson backer.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Rand Paul. Maybe Bernie Sanders if he is up against Hillary and a neocon.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Whoever is eventually anointed as the anti-Hillary.

Which will probably be someone like Jim Rogers, Darcy Richardson, or Lyndon LaRouche.

Your deluded if you don't think anyone will run against Hillary. Several candidates will, even if they have no chance in hell of beating her. They need to set themselves up in 2020 or 2024, after all.

Even if Hillary runs, expect Dean, Schweitzer, Sanders, and O'Malley to run, and maybe even a few other wildcards like Feingold, Hickenlooper, Nixon, Kaine, etc to jump in as well.

[IceSpear]

Whoever is eventually anointed as the anti-Hillary.

Which will probably be someone like Jim Rogers, Darcy Richardson, or Lyndon LaRouche.

Your deluded if you don't think anyone will run against Hillary. Several candidates will, even if they have no chance in hell of beating her. They need to set themselves up in 2020 or 2024, after all.

Even if Hillary runs, expect Dean, Schweitzer, Sanders, and O'Malley to run, and maybe even a few other wildcards like Feingold, Hickenlooper, Nixon, Kaine, etc to jump in as well.

I said no such thing. Are Jim Rogers, Darcy Richardson, and Lyndon LaRouche not people?

Also, Kaine? http://www.politico.com/story/2014/05/tim-kaine-hillary-clinton-2016-106300.html

Nixon said he'd only consider a run if Hillary didn't. Dean is obviously done with politics. Maybe Schweitzer will run as the Democratic version of Newt Gingrich to try to sell books.

[Mr. Morden]

O'Malley too only seems to be running as a backup plan, in case Clinton bows out.  It looks like if Clinton runs, no one more prominent than Sanders or Schweitzer is likely to challenge her (and those two are question marks as well, though Sanders is sounding more likely recently).  I also wouldn't rule out some random 3rd tier current or former member of Congress in the mold of Dennis Kucinich running against her (not necessarily Kucinich himself).

[Mr. Morden]

Dean is obviously done with politics.

Dean has gone back and forth on this, but most recently hinted that running again isn't off the table….but only if Clinton doesn't:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=164982.msg4054478#msg4054478

[free my dawg]

I'm just ready for Bernie.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Whoever is eventually anointed as the anti-Hillary.

Which will probably be someone like Jim Rogers, Darcy Richardson, or Lyndon LaRouche.

Your deluded if you don't think anyone will run against Hillary. Several candidates will, even if they have no chance in hell of beating her. They need to set themselves up in 2020 or 2024, after all.

Even if Hillary runs, expect Dean, Schweitzer, Sanders, and O'Malley to run, and maybe even a few other wildcards like Feingold, Hickenlooper, Nixon, Kaine, etc to jump in as well.

I said no such thing. Are Jim Rogers, Darcy Richardson, and Lyndon LaRouche not people?

Also, Kaine? http://www.politico.com/story/2014/05/tim-kaine-hillary-clinton-2016-106300.html

Nixon said he'd only consider a run if Hillary didn't. Dean is obviously done with politics. Maybe Schweitzer will run as the Democratic version of Newt Gingrich to try to sell books.

Again, your wrong about the field being cleared. People like Thad McCotter run not to win but to sell books/advance a cause/build a national profile. Schweitzer and Sanders are going to run, and I expect at least two other Buddy Roemeresque candidates also in the race for personal gain. No field is ever completely cleared.

[bedstuy]

Whoever is eventually anointed as the anti-Hillary.

Which will probably be someone like Jim Rogers, Darcy Richardson, or Lyndon LaRouche.

Your deluded if you don't think anyone will run against Hillary. Several candidates will, even if they have no chance in hell of beating her. They need to set themselves up in 2020 or 2024, after all.

Even if Hillary runs, expect Dean, Schweitzer, Sanders, and O'Malley to run, and maybe even a few other wildcards like Feingold, Hickenlooper, Nixon, Kaine, etc to jump in as well.

I said no such thing. Are Jim Rogers, Darcy Richardson, and Lyndon LaRouche not people?

Also, Kaine? http://www.politico.com/story/2014/05/tim-kaine-hillary-clinton-2016-106300.html

Nixon said he'd only consider a run if Hillary didn't. Dean is obviously done with politics. Maybe Schweitzer will run as the Democratic version of Newt Gingrich to try to sell books.

Again, your wrong about the field being cleared. People like Thad McCotter run not to win but to sell books/advance a cause/build a national profile. Schweitzer and Sanders are going to run, and I expect at least two other Buddy Roemeresque candidates also in the race for personal gain. No field is ever completely cleared.

I think you might be right in the broad view, but wrong on the particulars.  For any individual candidate, running against Hillary Clinton is going to be costly.  It's going to essentially end their career in Democratic politics because many people will see it as pointless and divisive.  So, I think it's hasty to say Sanders or Schweitzer will run, even if they toy with the idea to grab the spotlight or sell books. 

However, it only takes one person to make the decision.  You can assume that someone will run a campaign, if only to establish their credentials as the standard bearer for the left-win of American politics. 

[Mr. Morden]

For any individual candidate, running against Hillary Clinton is going to be costly.  It's going to essentially end their career in Democratic politics because many people will see it as pointless and divisive.  So, I think it's hasty to say Sanders or Schweitzer will run, even if they toy with the idea to grab the spotlight or sell books. 

Sanders is in his 70s, and not even really a Democrat.  (Though it looks like he'll run as a Dem in 2016 if he gets in the race.)  What does he care about having a future in Democratic politics?

Likewise, Schweitzer will be 60 next year, and doesn't really seem to have any political ambitions beyond the presidency, so I don't think he cares either.  (And of course, he's already been critical of not just Clinton but Obama too, so he's already shown indifference to currying favor with the mainstream of the party.)

That said, I do actually agree that it's premature to assume that either will run.  Schweitzer, I don't know.  He runs hot and cold on the idea of running, but mostly cold.  He talks about how much loves Iowa, and then in the next sentence says that running for president would "ruin his life".

Sanders…..Usually when a politician says "I don't really want to run.  But the issues that I care about are so important that I may have to", they're blowing smoke.  However, in Sanders's case, I think it's plausible.  He might actually be sincere in suggesting that he'll run and challenge Clinton from the left only if no one else does.  The key question then is who counts as "no one else"?  If the only challenger is someone like the Democratic version of Thad McCotter, then is that enough of a challenge that Sanders will sit out?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Not exactly, no. I really like Rand Paul in a lot of ways, but I still have doubts about him as president.

[bedstuy]

For any individual candidate, running against Hillary Clinton is going to be costly.  It's going to essentially end their career in Democratic politics because many people will see it as pointless and divisive.  So, I think it's hasty to say Sanders or Schweitzer will run, even if they toy with the idea to grab the spotlight or sell books. 

Sanders is in his 70s, and not even really a Democrat.  (Though it looks like he'll run as a Dem in 2016 if he gets in the race.)  What does he care about having a future in Democratic politics?

Likewise, Schweitzer will be 60 next year, and doesn't really seem to have any political ambitions beyond the presidency, so I don't think he cares either.  (And of course, he's already been critical of not just Clinton but Obama too, so he's already shown indifference to currying favor with the mainstream of the party.)

That said, I do actually agree that it's premature to assume that either will run.  Schweitzer, I don't know.  He runs hot and cold on the idea of running, but mostly cold.  He talks about how much loves Iowa, and then in the next sentence says that running for president would "ruin his life".

Sanders…..Usually when a politician says "I don't really want to run.  But the issues that I care about are so important that I may have to", they're blowing smoke.  However, in Sanders's case, I think it's plausible.  He might actually be sincere in suggesting that he'll run and challenge Clinton from the left only if no one else does.  The key question then is who counts as "no one else"?  If the only challenger is someone like the Democratic version of Thad McCotter, then is that enough of a challenge that Sanders will sit out?

Even if you're not worried about your next election or lobbying job in Washington, you don't necessarily want to tarnish your name.  These politicians have social circles and families that may not want the negative attention.  They need to hire staffs and listen to people around them. 

[Mr. Morden]

For any individual candidate, running against Hillary Clinton is going to be costly.  It's going to essentially end their career in Democratic politics because many people will see it as pointless and divisive.  So, I think it's hasty to say Sanders or Schweitzer will run, even if they toy with the idea to grab the spotlight or sell books. 

Sanders is in his 70s, and not even really a Democrat.  (Though it looks like he'll run as a Dem in 2016 if he gets in the race.)  What does he care about having a future in Democratic politics?

Likewise, Schweitzer will be 60 next year, and doesn't really seem to have any political ambitions beyond the presidency, so I don't think he cares either.  (And of course, he's already been critical of not just Clinton but Obama too, so he's already shown indifference to currying favor with the mainstream of the party.)

That said, I do actually agree that it's premature to assume that either will run.  Schweitzer, I don't know.  He runs hot and cold on the idea of running, but mostly cold.  He talks about how much loves Iowa, and then in the next sentence says that running for president would "ruin his life".

Sanders…..Usually when a politician says "I don't really want to run.  But the issues that I care about are so important that I may have to", they're blowing smoke.  However, in Sanders's case, I think it's plausible.  He might actually be sincere in suggesting that he'll run and challenge Clinton from the left only if no one else does.  The key question then is who counts as "no one else"?  If the only challenger is someone like the Democratic version of Thad McCotter, then is that enough of a challenge that Sanders will sit out?

Even if you're not worried about your next election or lobbying job in Washington, you don't necessarily want to tarnish your name.  These politicians have social circles and families that may not want the negative attention.  They need to hire staffs and listen to people around them. 

Running against Clinton won't tarnish Sanders's name among the people whose opinion Sanders cares about.