Login

Here are the Democrat Favorites to Take on Trump in 2020

But of all these potential Democrat candidates, if you made me bet on anyone right now, I'd be putting my money on...

I first started paying attention to politics in 1988 when my Dad ran for a county office in Indiana. Four years later I was in junior high when Bill Clinton came from nowhere to win the presidency. It’s bizarre to think that heading into another presidential election, it’s been that long ago since the Democrat Party nomination has really been up for grabs.

But think about it:

  • In 1996, Bill Clinton was running for re-election.
  • In 2000, Al Gore was the obvious successor to Clinton’s legacy.
  • In 2004, though the Democrat left pumped up Howard Dean, even pre-scream it was well known his nomination was far less likely than John Kerry.
  • In 2008, it was Hillary’s turn.
  • In 2012, Obama’s re-election.
  • In 2016, it was Hillary’s turn again…and this time precautions were taken to ensure no Obama figure stole it from under her.

In other words, there has always been a favorite, an assumed "chosen one." But 2020 is setting up to be completely different. It’s setting up like 2008, 2012, and 2016 for the Republicans: a crowded stage for the early debates and a frantic scramble for support.

So while it’s too early to project the nominee – after all, few would have predicted a coming Trump nomination and victory in early 2014 – it’s still intriguing to consider the horse race that is shaping up.

Top tier contenders include former Vice President Joe Biden, Senator Elizabeth Warren, Governor Deval Patrick, Senator Bernie Sanders, and Senator Cory Booker.

Outside competitors are shaping up as well: Senator Kristen Gillibrand, Governor Terry McAuliffe, Governor Andrew Cuomo, Senator Kamala Harris.

And even some complete dark horses: Governor Jerry Brown, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

Historically a far-left candidate would lead early followed by the emergence of a more consensus candidate (think Paul Tsongas leading before Bill Clinton emerges; Howard Dean leading before John Kerry emerges). But that’s the old Democrat Party. Today’s iteration of Democrats have tacked much further left, have become much more radicalized, and are less interested than ever in consensus-building. Donald Trump has done nothing but exacerbate that extremist tendency on the left, which elevates the electoral odds for ultra-liberal candidates like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

But if you made me bet on anyone right now? My money is on Cory Booker. In fact, I’ll take it a step further. I think it will be Booker and Kamala Harris taking on Trump/Pence in 2020.

Good heavens, what has become of our once great republic?

John Kerry isn't far left? … LOL!!

The hyper-shrill Left cannot get more unhinged than Booker-Harris.

Why not anyone? Seriously, the last election -- rather the election of Trump -- shows that there is literally no standard in which to select a POTUS. There are hundreds of thousands of people (on both sides) more qualified and more equipped to be president. Anybody, short of a serial killer, would be a better choice than the current occupant.

Biden should have ran. He'd be president right now.

Not anymore. By 2004 standards he was. Today, he is a moderate in the Democrat party.

Pretty much anyone has a shot after Trump, that much is true. I would point out that the standard was blown up with Obama. The man had no significant accomplishment in his entire life until he beat the anointed one, Hillary Clinton. Sitting on the back bench of the Senate for less than 4 years is not an accomplishment. I'm no Trump fan, but just as there are many people who would be better, there are even more that would be worse, Hillary and Barack as just two examples. Going to ridiculous places just makes you look like a tool.

And yes, Biden would be the President right now if he would have ran. There is no way he doesn't scrape up another 78,000 votes over Hillary Clinton in the four closest states and win the electoral college.

Trump running for reelection is going to be stronger than he was in 2016, most likely. The "blow the world up" fears will be shown to be unfounded, which will revert back to the inherent flaws of Trump. He is scandal proof, so that won't work. His election will hinge on the turnout of the center-right voter base, similar to Bush in 2004. If Bush doesn't get a record turnout in 2004, he would have lost to Kerry. Trump is going to have to do the same thing because he isn't going to capture a Reagan type majority or likely have an influential 3rd party to siphon out opposition voters like Bill Clinton did.

etbass wrote:
"[...] the standard was blown up with Obama. The man had no significant accomplishment in his entire life until he beat the anointed one, Hillary Clinton. Sitting on the back bench of the Senate for less than 4 years is not an accomplishment. "

So according to your "logic", Ted Cruz was manifestly unqualified for the POTUS job in 2016 as well??

I am sorry but this is just dumb. Cruz (like Obama or Hillary Clinton) did not have a long track record in office, it's true, but had solid background as appointed official (attorney, solicitor general), working for law firms as well as a degree from Harvard Law School.

As for Donald J Trump, we finally have conclusive evidence one cannot be a competent, effective POTUS without understanding how government works.

Trump has no understanding of how government works which is why he changes his mind daily and goes after (via Twitter) those who disagree with him. Trump is the king and we are his subjects. He is incompetent and ineffective as a Republican. He does make a good Democrat.

Stories