Imagine it's election night in FL. We're down to the wire. Trump & Dem. are tied.

[Honeycombe8]

It changes regularly...Trump's ahead, then the Dem. is ahead, then Trump's ahead, then the Dem. is ahead.

There have been some problems in the state. Bad weather resulted in some polling places being closed temporarily. Some ballots have gone missing in some districts. There may have been an issue with absentee ballots.

But the counting continues. In the end, Trump is ahead. He declares himself the winner, even if only technically and barely.

Which Democratic candidate is going to go to the mat, to ensure he or she lost legitimately? To ensure every vote that is needed, is counted? Which Democratic candidate is going to insist that the people know for certain who their state voted for? Which candidate is going to say that it's very unlikely that further counting would change the results, so for the good of the country, we need to move forward and accept that Trump won?

I'm guessing (and this is in no way saying that I think they are the best candidates or ones I plan on supporting for the nomination)...I'm thinking that the most tenacious and insistent on all votes being counted would be Sanders and Warren. ???

Who do you think would go the distance, even at the end of a very loooong race?

[JoeOtterbein]

1. I agree. I want a fighter for every last vote. nt

[Honeycombe8]

2. But which ones do you think are the most tenacious in that way? nt

[JoeOtterbein]

6. Still undecided. Was leaning Warren until she would not take on Fox. Now, I'm leaning towards...

...Mayor Pete. He did a great job on Fox. That is where we can grab some indie voters. We will need them.

I'm curious if Biden will take on Fox directly like Pete and Bernie.

[FoxNewsSucks]

12. I think Warren was right to publicly condemn Fox.

Sanders, Klobuchar and Mayor Pete did great jobs of getting a liberal message out, and pointing out the bias of the Fox "news" Sewer. We don't need for all of the candidates to go on there, and definitely NO to a democratic debate. Warren clearly spelled out the "hate-for-profit" motive of Fox.

So I think they have the right strategy on this - a few go on the town halls to get the message out, and others condemn Fox for what it is.

[Demsrule86]

4. Biden

[customerserviceguy]

8. And that person will prove themself

during the rock-em-sock-em primary season. Unless Joe Biden just walks away with it. If he has to fight for the nomination, it makes him a better candidate in the general election and its aftermath.

[JI7]

10. how about those who never got to vote ?

[SouthernProgressive]

3. Warren.

Not sure about Sanders. I think he would determine the chances and what would be best for his “revolution.”

I also think Warren would have stronger established Democrats supporting her efforts. She is more of a coalition builder.

Wish I could say that all of our candidates would fight but Warren is who I would bank on in your scenario. I doubt I will vote for her in the primary but there is so much to respect and admire about her.

[Honeycombe8]

17. You may be right about Sanders.

He just seems to have that sort of personality, but you're right about his revolution. That's where his heart really is. Then again, he has a stick-to-it-til-you-drop personality.

[Hoyt]

5. I'm not so sure it will be close in Florida with that ticket. Sorry.

[Honeycombe8]

13. I just picked it because of the Bush-Gore election. Could be any critical state.

But a recent poll I saw had Trump as a pretty solid 50% of the state, regardless of his opponent. That may have changed, though. It's a swing state and is often close.

[msongs]

7. it's about 12 yrs too late to go the mat is it not? nt

[Honeycombe8]

15. What do you mean? Obama won in 2008. nt

[beachbum bob]

9. not one democratic president candidate will ever back done on the state of a close election

much been learned from 2000

[Honeycombe8]

18. I wish I could agree.

Some of them know they have almost no chance of getting the nomination and are in it for other reasons. If they should get the nomination in a surprise win, I think they may not have the fire in their belly to go the distance, if the going gets too tough.

[JI7]

11. Sanders doesn't even take the Russian attacks on the election seriously

agree that Warren is a fighter.

[Honeycombe8]

14. I didn't know that.

I wonder if it's because he thinks they may have been working against Hillary even during the primary.

I don't know THAT much about Warren, but she seems like a pit bull to me.

[brooklynite]

16. Answer: all of them...

What they MAY not do, which some people here will object to, is not claim that the election was "stolen" unless there's absolute evidence (NC-9 type evidence, not statistics and conspiracy theories).

[Hortensis]

19. Obviously the biggest one, the one who can knock

Trump's teeth out and then, when he's scrambling for them in the rug, grab him by his hair and drag him out of the oval office.

Honeycombe, Sanders' viability isn't going to survive Super Tuesday, though he'll likely refuse to leave the national stage and instead hang on criticizing Democrats to the for-him bitter end.

As for your scenario, please remember that after Sanders' involvement in our massive 2016 losses, including silently acceding in Russia's use of him to achieve that end, Sanders didn't try to challenge the legality of the election, he blamed the Democrats and took the opportunity to claim we lost only because he wasn't the nominee. So, big NO to imagining him as a strong man instead of a critical weakness.

Agree Warren is a good choice, but for broken teeth I'd go for Kamala Harris or Amy Klobuchar. Of course, Biden has expressed a desire to beat Trump up, and he is a big guy I'd put up against the orange gas bag any time, but still, eagerness to brawl was predicated on them both being over a half century younger. So second choice would probably be one of our middle-aged governors since governors tend to be good scrappers. I don't know any of their fighting weights, though.