Okay, I accept in 2012 that Obama will almost certainly be the nominee , but in 2016

[white_wolf]

can we please work hard to nominate a real progressive such as Kucinich, Weiner, Sanders.etc?

[littlewolf]

1. wouldn't Sanders have to switch parties ???

[white_wolf]

2. Damn. I keep forgetting he is Independent.

[MissDeeds]

7. Wouldn't Obama?

[Blue-Jay]

12. hurr hurr hurr!

[vroomvroom]

26. LOL...Good one!

[Solomon]

38. Except that Obama will be ineligible in 2016

FAIL.

[CakeGrrl]

3. Good luck thinking at all you need is a "Real Progressive" to bring Washington to heel. n/t

[madinmaryland]

4. Martin O'Malley is my choice in 2016. Governor of Maryland who is actually

passing environmental laws and progressive taxation.

[tallahasseedem]

5. Can we just focus on 2012 right now...

we got some serious crazy going on with the Trump right now.

[vaberella]

18. No they can't. They don't even care about f* Congress. There are no REAL thinkers here.

They think the President can do all things. It's so frustrating to deal with.

[Imajika]

6. Kucinich will never, ever be the nominee...

It's just not going to happen.

How about another Howard Dean run? That I'd love to see. I keeping thinking back to 2004 and what might have been.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

34. Got that right. No doubt, Howard would have mopped the floor with dumbass.

[GeorgeGist]

8. It's lonely being ahead of the curve..

[SheilaT]

9. Just change the year on the sign

to 2016 and where can I sign up?

Sigh. In reality she would have no interest in running, but a girl can dream.

[Hippo_Tron]

10. Being progressive requires risk taking because this country is so brainwashed

And risk taking isn't something that is conducive to winning the presidency. If we're ever going to get progressive change, it's going to come from the ground up. Trying to simply put somebody who will govern significantly to the left of Obama in the White House isn't going to happen by simply putting a different person in there and hoping they will do what you want them to.

[Pisces]

11. NO, because none of those named would win. In order to make changes you need to be in power.

Some good nominating Kucinich would be if we lost the prize in the end and the Repubs get to pick the next Supreme Court Justices as well as try to undo all that Barack accomplished.

[DCBob]

13. How about Debbie Wasserman Schultz?

Maybe not progressive enough for some of you but she has the "cajones" to win.. and she is from a very important swing state.

[davidpdx]

25. Her and Feingold would be interesting together

[DCBob]

27. Yes they would.

Sounds like a winner to me.

[NorthCarolina]

30. I doubt she would take a course to the left of Obama. She's a DLC New Dem as well isn't she? nt

[quiller4]

43. She is not DLC n/t

[NorthCarolina]

44. Actually, she is a NDC member which

is the Congressional Branch of the DLC.

From Wikipedia: "The New Democrat Coalition was founded in 1997 by Representatives Cal Dooley (California), Jim Moran (Virginia) and Timothy J. Roemer (Indiana) as a congressional affiliate of the avowedly centrist Democratic Leadership Council ".

Here's her mug shot on the NDC member page: http://ndc.crowley.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=62&Itemid=54

She's DLC all right, count on it.

[Freddie Stubbs]

35. She probably would need some executive or Senate experience first

No sitting House member has been elected to the White House since 1880.

[GameOn]

14. None of those people are electable nationally. NT

[4lbs]

15. How about a Progressive that can at least win his own state?

So, that leaves Kucinich out.

[quiller4]

42. Well said. n/t

[MadBadger]

16. I'll support Russ Feingold

[Keith Bee]

37. I'm leaning that way as well

[vaberella]

17. You're worried about 2016. Why not looking into getting us REAL Progressives for Congress?!

Or your real progressive candidate will face the same shit. Then you'll throw him under the bus too.

[thelordofhell]

19. You're gonna need someone who could beat Biden

The Veep almost always runs after the Presidential term limits are up

[MadBadger]

21. Biden will be 74

Something to consider. If Joe runs Id support him in a second, but I could see him not running at 74

[Fearless]

20. How about an actual Democrat?

Unbeholden to corporations and such. You know... the kind of guy that actually helps the middle class.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

22. I'd like to see Howard Dean give it another try in 2016

Lord knows he's earned it.
with Sen. Sherrod Brown as his V-P

[calimary]

23. Eliot Spitzer?

[BluegrassDem]

24. Only on DU would we pick a bunch of losers

Grayson, Feingold, etc. can't even in in their own state! How the fuck are they supposed to win the Electoral College?? SMH....

[dionysus]

28. it'd be funny, in theory, watching them lose all 50 states. until we would up with all republicans.

they'd manage to reduce the dems to a fringe party in one election cycle...

[Kdillard]

31. Let them live in their own fantasy world.

[Shiver]

33. In a normal cycle, Feingold would have won.

Citizens United and a mobilized far right wing was what caused him to lose.

[slackmaster]

29. Obama will declare Martial Law in 2016. There won't be any election.

:sarcasm:

[mkultra]

32. or, we will just vote for who we want and you keep bitching

[TheKentuckian]

36. The "Centrists" will continue to walk us down the same path.

and party and business "leaders" will control the process and give us more of the same.

[HughBeaumont]

39. Sherrod Brown.

Probably too soon, but in the future?

[liberalpragmatist]

40. Weiner isn't a real progressive

I like the guy, but he's not really a Sanders-type progressive. For years he was a New Dem-ish backbencher from the outer boroughs with a voting record that was friendly to Wall St. and deeply hawkish on military matters and the ME. He was never an outspoken progressive during the Bush years, for example. And he ran for mayor in 2005 as a centrist, but narrowly lost the Democratic primary.

Basically, after passing on running for mayor in '09 against Bloomberg, he decided he needed to carve out a bigger profile against what will be a wide Democratic field for the 2013 mayor's race. So he decided to start being aggressively and outspokenly progressive on health care issues - namely, talking up single-payer and the public option - and going on MSNBC a lot. Never mind that he was never - and during the health care debate was not - a major legislator on health care issues.

Look, like I said I like that guy. But for anybody who's familiar with NYC politics, it's obvious that while he's probably a mainstream, moderately liberal NY Dem, a lot of his "progressive champion" schtick is a transparent ploy to be the candidate of both the outer burroughs AND Manhattan liberals in 2013.

[quiller4]

41. You want to nominate Kucinich, seriously? What is the point of nominating

somebody who turns off half the people in his own party?

[robcon]

45. Kucinich maxed out at 4% in the Democratic primaries.

This is not a guy to nominate for president.

[Tarheel_Dem]

46. Thank You!

:applause: