Who is most like Obama?

[Sir Mohamed]

Thoughts? I go with Hillary of course.

[Phony Moderate]

Obama is neither a sociopath nor a socialist nutter, though he is quite telegenic, so O'Malley it is.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Honestly, O'Malley is at this point

[morgieb]

Obama is neither a sociopath nor a socialist nutter, though he is quite telegenic, so O'Malley it is.

Does not compute.

[This account no longer in use.]

Hillary has stated quite a few times that her presidency would 'expand on Obama's policies' (read: be a third term of Obama).

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Hillary has stated quite a few times that her presidency would 'expand on Obama's policies' (read: be a third term of Obama).

Yes, she's not nuts. Doesn't mean they're similar.

None of these candidates hold a candle to Barack, of course.

[Cassius]

Actually, taking both fields into account, probably Rubio. I mean, both are (well, Obama was in 2008) one term Senators from ethnic minority backgrounds, who haven't really achieved anything of note, but nonetheless have been propelled to the 'top tier' of their respective primary fields on the basis of the fact that they apparently have 'compelling stories', which for some reason is a justification for them leapfrogging candidates with more substantial political achievements (for the Democrats, Hillary, Edwards, Biden, Dodd etc, for the Republicans, Bush, Christie and Kasich). Both are competent speakers, although their actual campaigning abilities leave something to be desired. Both have the media in the tank for them (at least in the primaries).

Obviously, as I indicated, I'm talking about 2008 Obama, as they're aren't really any good matches for 2016 Obama.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Clinton, who has a soecial connection with Latinos and is a fighter like Obama, tk any GOP obstruction.

[RINO Tom]

Well, it's obviously Clinton since she decided she desperately needed to become a carbon copy of him to win, LOL.

[This account no longer in use.]

Actually, taking both fields into account, probably Rubio. I mean, both are (well, Obama was in 2008) one term Senators from ethnic minority backgrounds, who haven't really achieved anything of note, but nonetheless have been propelled to the 'top tier' of their respective primary fields on the basis of the fact that they apparently have 'compelling stories', which for some reason is a justification for them leapfrogging candidates with more substantial political achievements (for the Democrats, Hillary, Edwards, Biden, Dodd etc, for the Republicans, Bush, Christie and Kasich). Both are competent speakers, although their actual campaigning abilities leave something to be desired. Both have the media in the tank for them (at least in the primaries).

Obviously, as I indicated, I'm talking about 2008 Obama, as they're aren't really any good matches for 2016 Obama.

How could you forget Obama leapfrogging MIKE GRAVEL?

[PresidentTRUMP]

Honestly, O'Malley, not that it matters. Biden should have ran, chose Booker as his VP. Obama actually likes Biden and would go to war for him and go around the country really fighting for him.

Dems ticket in 2016 should have been IMO:

Biden / Booker.

[anvi]

There was something like a sliver of a difference between Obama's and Clinton's policy platforms in 2008 aside from their differences about the Iraq War.  On that sliver of a differences, Obama eventually  moved toward Clinton on--namely health insurance "mandates."  So, yeah, Hillary.