Who is the Who in If not Hillary, Who????

[CK_John]

I hope Gillibrand steps up so that she gets experience, even though I think it will be another 8 yrs.

[lumberjack_jeff]

1. I still like Schweitzer. n/t

[NYC_SKP]

2. Anyone.

That's who.

Wendy Davis, Alison Lundergan Grimes, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Poehler, Snooki...

[RiverLover]

4. ABC Anyone But Clinton

Here are 22 progressive Democrats I'd like to learn more about~

...But on December 20th, Senator Warren signed onto a letter criticizing the Obama Administration's apparent effort to force the European Union to agree to purchase this oil. As the Huffington Post's Kate Sheppard reported, "Six senators and 16 House members, all Democrats, wrote a letter to Froman on Friday asking him to elaborate on his position on the matter. 'If these reports are accurate, USTR's [the U.S. Trade Representative's] actions could undercut the EU's commendable goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in its transportation sectors," these 22 Democratic lawmakers wrote.

This is, essentially, a rebellion by 22 progressive congressional Democrats against the Clinton-Obama effort to provide a market for the Kochs' dirty oil. This letter was actually written by Representative Henry Waxman and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, and co-signed by Senators Barbara Boxer, Ed Markey, Dick Durbin, Jeff Merkley, and Elizabeth Warren; and Representatives John Conyers, Jr., Barbara Lee, Raúl M. Grijalva, Rush Holt, Louise M. Slaughter, Jerrold Nadler, Judy Chu, Peter DeFazio, Anna G. Eshoo, Sam Farr, Peter Welch, Alan Lowenthal, Mark Pocan, and Steve Cohen.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/elizabeth-warren-comes-do_b_4483753.html

[NYC_SKP]

6. Ooh! That's a good find!

On Friday, December 20th, Democratic U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren finally separated herself clearly from former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, regarding the issue of climate change and global warming. Here is the story:

TransCanada Corporation wants to build the Keystone XL Pipeline to carry oil from Alberta Canada's tar sands to two refineries owned by Koch Industries near the Texas Gulf Coast, for export to Europe; and Hillary Clinton has helped to make that happen, but Elizabeth Warren has now taken the opposite side.

Secretary of State Clinton, whose friend and former staffer Paul Elliot is a lobbyist for TransCanada, had worked behind the scenes to ease the way for commercial exploitation of this, the world's highest-carbon-emitting oil, 53% of which oil is owned by America's Koch Brothers. (Koch Industries owns 63% of the tar sands, and the Koch brothers own 86% of Koch Industries; Elaine Marshall, who is the widow of the son of the deceased Koch partner J. Howard Marshall, owns the remaining 14% of Koch Iindustries.)

David Goldwyn, who "served as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's Special Envoy and Coordinator for International Energy Affairs," is yet another lobbyist for TransCanada. So, TransCanada has two of Hillary's friends working for them. Misters Elliot and Goldwyn thus worked intimately with Hillary's people to guide them on selecting a petroleum industry contractor (not an environmental firm, much less any governmental agency) to prepare the required environmental impact statement for this proposed pipeline.

Clinton probably has herself convinced that she's on the right side of climate change but spends so much time with the wrong people that she's got no perspective on reality.

Link to the letter below:

http://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/news/release/waxman-and-whitehouse-question-us-trade-representatives-position-on-tar-sands

[RiverLover]

10. Rings true~

Clinton probably has herself convinced that she's on the right side of climate change but spends so much time with the wrong people that she's got no perspective on reality.

[arcane1]

21. I hate that shell game: export the oil and then claim that "domestic" emissions haven't increased.

[yeoman6987]

20. I think we need someone in Generation X

I am pretty sure that Republicans will go with a Gen Xer. Boomers have done plenty. I think it is time for the next generation to step up. Republicans will. Are we going to?

[CK_John]

23. The GOP will go with Moderate Mitt, his VP pick will be the only surprise.

[yeoman6987]

24. I Doubt that. I think Rubio or Walker.

Walker we have a chance. Rubio I think we're in trouble.

[Kingofalldems]

40. From your post it looks like you're an admirer of republicans.

Am I wrong?

[tabbycat31]

55. What Gen Xers do the Dems have?

There are only two Democrats in the Senate that I can see going higher, and one hasn't been there long enough (a little over a year).

This is one area where Democrats failed big time. The GOP has all these rising stars born in the 60s and 70s. Hopefully the Dems will do better with the 80s.

[loyalsister]

65. They will

And we are stupid if we have a candidate that could be their candidate's parent. The only time over the past 40 yrs where a considerably younger candidate didn't win was in 1980 when Reagan beat Carter.

[brooklynite]

27. Interesting that, when Warren signed ANOTHER letter, the reaction was less enthusiastic...

Sen. Elizabeth Warren says she hopes Hillary Rodham Clinton runs for president in 2016 — the latest in a series of declarations of support by the Massachusetts Democrat, who some have speculated could seek the Oval Office herself.

"All all of the women — Democratic women I should say — of the Senate urged Hillary Clinton to run, and I hope she does. Hillary is terrific," Warren said during an interview broadcast Sunday on ABC's "This Week," noting that she was one of several senators to sign a letter urging Clinton to run in 2016.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/04/27/elizabeth-warren-i-hope-hillary-clinton-runs-for-president/

[True Blue Door]

36. Warren might believe that, or might be a competent politician.

Either way, it doesn't change the reality that Hillary Clinton is completely insane - and not in any way that can be spun as "principled."

She's the nutcase who believes everything the GOP says about America and the Democratic Party, and intends to "lead" accordingly.

[brooklynite]

44. If it's all right with you, I'll leave it up to the "nincompoops" to decide...

As I recall, there were 17 million of them last time.

[True Blue Door]

48. I decide how I speak and vote. No one else.

[brooklynite]

52. Great as long as you're okay with the outcome...

Too many people here seem to already subscribe to the "THEY wouldn't give me a choice" lament...

[Autumn]

3. IMO Bernie is the only one who is speaking to the problems that the poor and working class

have. Yes I know he's not a democrats but he is more of a Democrat than the others.

[Snotcicles]

9. +1

[arcane1]

16. He set the bar for me.

[Autumn]

18. Bernie has an established record to go on. He is not an unknown Jr Sen. as Obama was in

2008. Bernie talks the talk and walks the walk. He sets a high standard as far as I am concerned.

[arcane1]

19. Exactly, he walks the damn walk!

Even if all I get is the chance to see him in the debates, that's going to be a good sign for the future. He'll put it OUT THERE!

[brooklynite]

29. Obama was not "unknown"...

...there was that little keynote speech in 2004.

[Autumn]

34. Along with a very short term in the Senate.

[True Blue Door]

37. True, but "speaking" to issues is insufficient to become President.

Speaking to issues is not even sufficient to do the job of President, if by some miracle the office were obtained.

You have to prove you can manage people. I remain thoroughly open-minded about all potentials, but Bernie Sanders has not yet shown us he can deliver.

I would rather lose under his standard than under Hillary's, but I reject false dilemmas also.

Somebody has to stand up and fly the flag to let us know who's who. And I mean deliver something.

[Autumn]

39. I think he can deliver.

Bernie is also consistent.

[True Blue Door]

43. I think anyone can do anything. The question is will he?

Sanders needs to deliver something soon to make himself viable. In fact, forget about what I or any other primary voter thinks - he needs to deliver something to discover in himself the resources to be an effective presidential candidate.

The same goes for any other prospect.

Deliver, then run. Don't promise shit. Do, then say "Look what I did! Now imagine what I can do with the Presidency!"

[Autumn]

45. Whatever. Bernie has my support, unless Liz runs. n/t

[True Blue Door]

50. Our responsibility is to the country, not to the candidate.

Sanders hasn't delivered yet. He has said a lot, but done not much. We have a long way to go before the primaries are decided. If you truly respect Bernie Sanders, demand more of him.

Hillary is out because she has delivered less than nothing every time she was in a position to do better. But there are still a lot of people other than Bernie Sanders who deserve a chance. You may not hear their names mentioned often in the Media Machine, but they are there. Look for them. Write to them. Think about them.

[Autumn]

60. I do just that n/t

[TheKentuckian]

63. He was a Mayor, that gives him more actual executive experience than some considered "proven"

[MrMickeysMom]

54. I'd support him, too.

HRC is not a leader. I'm terribly disappointed about that, too, as she COULD have been.

And so could Barack Obama. What a friggen shame about BOTH of them.

[Thinkingabout]

5. It sure looks good for several up and coming Democrat candidates.

I like the Castro brothers, I think they definitely have a great future. Allison Grimes is impressive, she may need a new coach but impressive.

[MoonRiver]

7. One of the Castro brothers should be Hillary's running mate.

DYNAMITE!

[Rstrstx]

57. I love the Castro brothers and they would energize parts of the base, but.......

...their resumes are still a bit thin to really be qualified to be Vice President. Joaquin was just elected to the House in 2012, so he'll have been on the national stage less than 4 years. Julian has been a council member then mayor of San Antonio and briefly the HUD Secretary. I think by 2020 Julian could be qualified if he won a seat in House of Representatives in 2016 once his tenure in the Obama administration ends, that would give him experience at the local, national, and executive levels. Or he could be picked for a higher cabinet position in 2016. I'd still like to see a little more experience under his belt but it should be just enough for serious consideration. Personally I believe Julian has the slightly stronger resolve, he's certainly had more time in the spotlight.

We all know they are both upcoming stars in the party, but prematurely choosing someone without the experience to be VP could be disastrous. Just ask John McCain.

[tritsofme]

8. By the time Hillary announces, the only question will be:

Which prominent Democrat has not yet endorsed her?

[earthside]

11. U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar

She would make a great presidential candidate.

Of course, so would Elizabeth Warren.

My favorite, Sen. Sanders.

Brian Schweitzer would be a plus for Democrats.

If the Democratic Party elite establishment can be prevented from thrusting upon us the likes of Clinton or Cuomo, then 2016 will be a landslide year for Democrats.

Democrats have plenty of good, solid, progressive, diverse talent -- we don't need to be railroaded into a tired, old, boring choice just because the 'wise men/women' of the party say so.

[Aerows]

12. Clinton needs to retire with her millions

her daughter has millions, and none of the Clinton family will ever want for anything. 20% more of the American population is in poverty due to the NAFTA bill signed by Bill Clinton.

We all know that now. Hillary should just kick back and take it easy because she has more money that any 5000 people that would vote for her see in a lifetime - and those are the ones that aren't impoverished, but strictly middle upper class.

[Derek V]

13. Roger Daltry

Obvious!

[CK_John]

14. Who.

[Derek V]

15. Are You?

[Fawke Em]

30. Who? Who? Who? Who?

[Man from Pickens]

17. Anybody

I would literally vote for used toilet paper before I voted for Hillary Clinton.

[hrmjustin]

22. If Hillary does not run then I have no idea who I will support.

[brooklynite]

25. Gillibrand won't run against Hillary...

...if you recall the letter the Senate women (including Elizabeth Warren) sent encouraging Hillary to run; the letter was signed by ALL the female Democratic women, including Gillibrand.

[djean111]

26. Encouraging Hillary to run is not the same thing as "pledging" (weirdly popular term here)

not to run, themselves. Really, it is not the same thing.

[brooklynite]

31. Okay, name any candidate for President who ran after encouraging their eventual opponent to run.

[djean111]

59. Okay, tell me why there has to be a precedent. There does not have to be a precedent.

Again, signing that letter is not a pledge to not run. All I'm sayin'.
Doesn't matter if anyone else did the exact same thing.
And Obama said that no, he was not going to run for President. And then - he did.

Should be interesting, the primaries!

[AtomicKitten]

38. exactly

Chuck Schumer encouraged then Senator Obama to run for president. He also said he would have to endorse Hillary publically for obvious reasons (it's a New York thing).

Encouraging someone to run isn't an iron clad pledge of exclusive support.

[RiverLover]

51. Warren sounds like she signed the letter as a show of solidarity with female Democrats in the senate

rather than actually endorsing Hillary~

STEPHANOPOULOS: You've been pretty clear, and we showed it in Jeff Zeleny's piece, that you say you're not running for president in 2016. It seems like you've just affirmed it again. You also signed a letter -- several senators signed a letter earlier this year encouraging Hillary Clinton to run.

So is she your candidate in 2016?

WARREN: You know, all of the women -- Democratic women, I should say, of the Senate urged Hillary Clinton to run. And I hope she does.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You hope she does. And if she does, she is your candidate, you're going to endorse her?

WARREN: If Hillary -- Hillary is terrific.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You know, you've said she is terrific very many times. You say that again in this book, "A Fighting Chance." But this book leaves out something of a pointed criticism from your earlier book, "The Two Income Trap."

There you praised first lady Hillary Clinton for her opposition to this bankruptcy bill pushed by the big banks, but go on to talk about how she, as New York senator, seemed she could not afford that principled position.

Senator Clinton received 140,000 in campaign contributions from banking industry executives in a single year. Big banks were now part of Senator Clinton's constituency. She wanted their support, and they wanted hers, including a vote in favor of that awful bill.

So do you think that -- are you worried that somehow she will bow to big business, those were your words in that book, if she becomes president?

WARREN: Look, I've made it clear all the way through this book and really what I've been working on for the last 25 years, that I'm worried a lot about power in the financial services industry.

http://crooksandliars.com/2014/04/abcs-stephanopoulos-makes-elizabeth-warren

EW is so going to run. I predict she'll announce in February, if not sooner.

[99Forever]

28. Senator Bernie Sanders

That's who.Thanks for asking.

[brooklynite]

33. As a Hillary supporter, I have no problem with Sanders running...or with anyone voting for him

I just see no way he assembles a majority of the delegates for the nomination. Last I checked, DU was a TAD more liberal than the Party as a whole...

[brooklynite]

35. Just a thought, but diatribes like this aren't like to sway any voters from her side...

[True Blue Door]

41. She's the one who has to convince me.

I don't have to convince people who for some reason actually believe that Madame Nixon is the solution to the Democratic Party's problems.

If they win in the primaries, I fall into line.

Unless that happens, I speak my mind. She's the worst possible choice, combining arrogance with Stockholm Syndrome quasi-Republicanism.

[brooklynite]

42. Well, you DO have to convince the nincompoops if you actually want Bernie to win.....

or is the hard work of politics someone else's job?

[True Blue Door]

46. Hillary is the only candidate I've decided against, for overwhelming cause.

Everyone else is welcome to rise or fall according to merit. I'm skeptical of Sanders, but open-minded, as with everyone else.

[LawDeeDah]

66. You got to admit that making the Bosnia shit up means

something is not right upstairs.

and that is only One thing amongst so many like.

[craigmatic]

47. Cory Booker

[RiverLover]

53. I used to like him alot, but it seems he's a Wall Street/Corporate Dem after all

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/05/bookers_defense_of_wall_street.html

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/08/07/1229482/-Cory-Booker-In-the-pocket-of-both-Wall-Street-and-Silicon-Valley

[tabbycat31]

56. I don't think he's ready yet

I've seen his potential for awhile now (he blew me away when I saw him give a rally in 2009) but I think he needs a little more time in a statewide capacity. He's only been in the Senate for a little over a year (and I still feel strange typing this, he's forever the Newark mayor to me).

[RedstDem]

58. I'll go with any democrat

There's too many to list, but all better than a Dino

[krawhitham]

61. ABC

Anyone But Clinton

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

62. "Who"ever is the most progressive, most anti-war, candidate on the ballot.

I vote issues and principles, not personalities or party.

[CK_John]

64. They usually never make it to the ballot.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

67. Some do. And, my ballot comes with a spot to write in progressives if necessary.

[CK_John]

68. The classic ploy to avoid making a decision among the real possible candidates.

Then you can always claim well I didn't vote for .......

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

73. The classic ploy of not settling for "not as bad".

[CTyankee]

69. I know it sounds weird but I say a Warren/Schweitzer ticket...

But a number of "ifs" here...

If Warren can impress on various foreign policy fronts (as I think she is starting to do) and

if Schweitzer can be seen as the right person to mobilize the western U.S. states, and

if they have an inspired (and inspirational) message with excellent marketing strategies...

then I would say it would augur well for the Democratic ticket in 2016.

As I get older I get more and more painfully aware that what we think may be possible today may not prove out, or that we just don't know what is coming (which, IMO, is what happened in both instances with Barack Obama). And that is why predictions at this point are essentially futile. In addition, we don't know what is in people's hearts and desires. That goes for the candidates as well as the electorate.

[CK_John]

71. I agree, twitter is now more important than the DEM party. After 2014 it will be 2024

before the Democratic party regains the White House.

If the party still exists then.

[CTyankee]

72. Oh, not so fast CK! As I said, you never know...

there might be somebody in the wings, waiting to go onstage and deliver. Dems are presently in good shape for a Presidential run, while on the rocks when it comes to the House and Senate.

Since I am old, I can think back to unexpected twists and turns in the path to the presidency. I just read something about Gary Hart, which nobody saw coming. And the Florida stalemate resulting in the Supreme Court deciding the presidency. And, of course, Obama's upset over Hillary was another unexpected breakthrough.

The first woman president is far, far overdue for the U.S.A. Other countries all over the world have been electing women in top spots for years. Sometimes, what is to be, will be (but maybe with a different candidate...hence my hedging on considering Warren and only Warren even tho I just love her and will support her if she runs).

This morning sitting at my computer I am optimistic. But we'll see how this plays out...

[blackcrowflies]

70. Joe Biden, Bernie, Howard