Was Warren the strongest potential Democrat on par with Biden this year?

[uti2]

I don't think Biden would run for re-election, so in that context, in terms of a democrat getting 2 terms, Warren as the first woman president would be the ideal candidate, would she not?

Back in 2006-2007, the earlier posts here on atlas had this forum laughing at obama, calling him 'too far left', and projecting maps showing mccain winning 350 EVs against him. Obama was able to win due to his center-left coalition, would Warren be able to form something similar against any republican? I.E, look at the strongest republican this cycle, Kasich, Warren would be positioned to go after him with 'Lehman Brothers' and take even the strongest republican out like that.

Demographically, the obama coalition is larger than the republicans, so someone who can put that coalition together without leaking leftists Gore-style a la Hillary should be ideal.

The polling for Bernie had him pretty competitive as it was against the Republican candidates, even nationally against Kasich (those numbers would go down in a GE due to Bernie's baggage, but it shows that there can be genuine appeal for a left-wing candidate), and Warren would be a lot more toned down next to Bernie.

[uti2]

No. You want to make middle class moderates turn to the right, let the alternative be somebody who wants to redistribute the wealth. All those "educated suburban whites" we keep hearing about who are turning away from Trump would not have voted for Bernie or Elizabeth Warren no matter how much atlas loves them.

It's not about Trump, it's Warren vs. an average republican, even the strongest one like Kasich. Back in 2008 Fox and the Right were calling Obama every name under the son, socialist, communist, etc. and he ran as a full-progressive, single-payer and all.

Whereas Hillary is weak with the left wing of the dem base (people who didn't frequently vote for Dems before '08 or voted for Nader, etc.), Warren would've consolidated it a la Obama, and wouldn't have needed any Romney people, since the dem base is demographically larger than the republicans.

Hillary's current strategy is closer to Gore, dismal leftist turnout, focusing on the center (to be fair, that strategy works o.k. for an INCUMBENT as long you give some red meat now and then to the base, Obama's turnout was reduced for '12, but not enough to matter). Warren's would be closer to Obama's original '08 strategy, focusing on the left, while holding the traditional Gore/Kerry-base. Bernie eventually would've had problems even with the traditional Gore/Kerry-base due to his personal baggage (hence polls showing bernie competitive against all the republicans), but Warren would've been able to hold it while reaching out to the left a la Obama.

[uti2]

The polling says that Bernie was the strongest candidate against Trump. But know where stuck with Hillary.

The same polls also showed Bernie beating Cruz by double digits, but Republicans will try to deny it, while cherrypicking polls of other candidates beating Hillary as valid. The fact is that there is something to reaching out to progressives, and the Obama '08 strategy.

Hillary should be lucky that Bernie was able to influence her platform a bit and make her more left, that should be something which helps her out not only this year, but also in the future.

If Republican 'base theory', 'reaching out to the right' is supposedly valid, why not Democratic 'base theory', 'reaching out to the left'. Obama won his reelection because his coalition was larger, even with a handicap of lower turnout vs. '08.

[uti2]

If Republican 'base theory', 'reaching out to the right' is supposedly valid, why not Democratic 'base theory', 'reaching out to the left'. Obama won his reelection because his coalition was larger, even with a handicap of lower turnout vs. '08.

Turnout wasn't actually lower than 2008 where it mattered. With the exception of OH/PA, every swing state had more voters cast ballots in 2012 than in 2008.

Well, also NH, but Republicans can't win without BOTH OH and FL, take out OH, and they've already lost. Look at Karl Rove's meltdown over OH in 2012, he was expecting lower turnout, yet Obama was able to hold his coalition together for the most part.

[uti2]

I love Warren, but I doubt she'd be the strongest candidate. She's got her share of faux scandals as well, and I think the far right would warm up to Trump more easily against someone as liberal as her.

You don't need center-right  or even most independent voters if you can keep your progressive numbers up (Romney won independents), Hillary lost a significant amount of progressives a la Gore. Besides, those center-right voters who will actually vote for a dem are negligible (could imagine cruz's religious fanatic voters who think homosexuality should be banned voting for a liberal dem?), hence Hillary's polling issues, someone who can focus on progressives, and the obama coalition would be in the majority % regardless of what happens on the R side since demographically obama's coalition is larger than the republicans.