Who would be the alternative to Elizabeth Warren in 2020?

[Mister Mets]

If Elizabeth Warren were to run in 2020 against a Republican president, she would presumably be one of the frontrunners. A big part of the primary would be about offering an alternative. Who would be best positioned for that?

It's a plausible scenario. Let's say Hillary Clinton loses in November 2016, and Elizabeth Warren starts declaring her interest for 2020. Age is the biggest issue, as she would be older than any first time candidate, but it's not insurmountable. She'll be younger than McCain and Dole when they were the Republican party's nominees, and about two years older than Hillary in the current presidential cycle. More women are getting significant careers later in life, with Janet Yellen as a prominent example, becoming Chair of the Federal Reserve at 67. Many of the elderly are healtheir than ever, with Ted Strickland announcing a Senate bid when he'll be 75 on Election Day.

When there's a major frontrunner, a big part of the primary is developing the best contrast with that individual (See Bush-McCain, and Clinton-Obama.) So, who can offer a big contrast with Warren?

[Thunderbird is the word]

I think that it would be a clash of ideas between the "Warren wing" of the party and DLC types, the latter group represented perhaps by Andrew Cuomo or Cory Booker...Booker more likely since he's more likeable and less corrupt then Cuomo.

[Suburbia]

Cuomo, Booker, Heinrich, maybe Vilsack.

[Skill and Chance]

I have to think she would nearly clear the field if she ran.  NH is close to home for her and the other early primary states are quite anti-establishment.  Also, you have to consider the optics of attacking a woman candidate on her age.  That will backfire severely on anyone who tries, whether in 2016 or in 2020.     

[Mr. Illini]

Booker most likely

[IceSpear]

Probably depends how Cuomo's re-election goes. If he loses the primary (or gets embarrassed in it by a Teachout-esque figure again) or loses the general, he'd likely be seen as damaged goods and the anti-Warren people would want somebody else. If it goes well, it will likely be him. If not, possibly Booker, Emanuel, Warner, Patrick, Raimondo, or someone who may get elected in 2016. It's also possible a Gillibrand or Klobuchar "appeal to all wings" figure could step in.

[Mister Mets]

Cuomo would need some tremendous successes in New York to repair his image with the Democratic base.

My guess is that the best counter to Warren would be Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Julian Castro or Hillary Clinton's 2016 running mate.

Since African-Americans are the majority of Democratic primary voters in major districts, a black candidate would be at an advantage. Booker's as effective as Warren at earning free media, and can use his executive experience to provide a major contrast. He could be hurt by an anti-Wall Street argument, although he's likely to do well with donors.

Castro would represent a major first (especially since this scenario has Warren fighting to be the second female nominee) without Booker's Wall Street baggage.

Kamala Harris could do well with African American voters, while still allowing Democratic primary voters to support a potential first female President. She has a different expertise than Warren ("Smart on Crime" is a great record for a Democrat to run on especially given the current interest in justice in policing) and limited negatives. She would be a fresh face with experience (six years as California AG, seven years as San Francisco DA.)

Whoever Hillary picks as a running mate will have a high profile. Assuming they handled themselves credibly on the campaign trail, a Xavier Becerra, Anthony Foxx, Tim Kaine, Mark Warner, Michael Bennet or Martin Heinrich could have a prime mover advantage.

[IceSpear]

Cuomo would need some tremendous successes in New York to repair his image with the Democratic base.

My guess is that the best counter to Warren would be Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Julian Castro or Hillary Clinton's 2016 running mate.

Since African-Americans are the majority of Democratic primary voters in major districts, a black candidate would be at an advantage. Booker's as effective as Warren at earning free media, and can use his executive experience to provide a major contrast. He could be hurt by an anti-Wall Street argument, although he's likely to do well with donors.

Castro would represent a major first (especially since this scenario has Warren fighting to be the second female nominee) without Booker's Wall Street baggage.

Kamala Harris could do well with African American voters, while still allowing Democratic primary voters to support a potential first female President. She has a different expertise than Warren ("Smart on Crime" is a great record for a Democrat to run on especially given the current interest in justice in policing) and limited negatives. She would be a fresh face with experience (six years as California AG, seven years as San Francisco DA.)

Whoever Hillary picks as a running mate will have a high profile. Assuming they handled themselves credibly on the campaign trail, a Xavier Becerra, Anthony Foxx, Tim Kaine, Mark Warner, Michael Bennet or Martin Heinrich could have a prime mover advantage.

Isn't Harris just as progressive as Warren?

[136or142]

Me!

[Blair]

Julian Castro? Martin Heinrich? Cory Booker? Kristen Gillibrand? Gavin Newsom?

[bobloblaw]

well she'd be 71 in 2020.

[Suburbia]

If it's Vilsack I could see him edging out Warren because:
1)The DNC insiders would want him,
2)He's more electable than Warren
3) He can do better in the South and Midwest than her policies

[Skill and Chance]

well she'd be 71 in 2020.

Probably irrelevant.  Why do I have to keep reminding everyone that female life expectancy is 5 years longer?  Woman age 71 = man age 66.  Romney was 65 in 2012.

[henster]

well she'd be 71 in 2020.

Probably irrelevant.  Why do I have to keep reminding everyone that female life expectancy is 5 years longer?  Woman age 71 = man age 66.  Romney was 65 in 2012.

If Hillary loses at 69, Dems will probably want a younger candidate.

[JoshPA]

the most likely nominee biden.

[Person Man]

Can we just stop throwing out names? Kthx

[SCNCmod]

I see Warren fizzing out a bit by 2020.   I don't think she is quite as popular as many may think.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

The junior Senator from Wisconsin.

[exopolitician]

Bernie, or if we're looking for someone "younger" I'd go with Kamala Harris or Amy Klobuchar.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Warren is the alternative to Bernie, not the other way around. Brown is the one other person mentioned much who has established themselves to not be a total shill for Wall Street.

[SCNCmod]

Why would anyone care about her being 71 if her rival is 74?

Since Kennedy... Every Democratic President Elected.... has been younger than 54.  (while every republican President Elected has been older than 54). 

Not sure why... maybe younger candidates do a better job of turning out the youth vote (which is overwhelmingly Dem)

[Shadows]

Why would anyone care about her being 71 if her rival is 74?

Since Kennedy... Every Democratic President Elected.... has been younger than 54.  (while every republican President Elected has been older than 54). 

Not sure why... maybe younger candidates do a better job of turning out the youth vote (which is overwhelmingly Dem)

Yes Bernie is 40 & that's why he got so many young people to turn out because he is young Duh!!! O Malley is an old weirdo guy & thus couldn't get young people

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Why would anyone care about her being 71 if her rival is 74?

Since Kennedy... Every Democratic President Elected.... has been younger than 54.  (while every republican President Elected has been older than 54). 

Not sure why... maybe younger candidates do a better job of turning out the youth vote (which is overwhelmingly Dem)

LBJ was 56. Bush was 54 in 2000.