4/
Those two are easily the two most likely candidates, but there are a number of minor candidates that also merit a discussion.
To start with, Beto O'Rorke. A progressive who comes with a number of problems that make his accession unlikely. To start with, O'Rorke's platform mostly focuses on gun control, a popular... Read more
4/
Those two are easily the two most likely candidates, but there are a number of minor candidates that also merit a discussion.
To start with, Beto O'Rorke. A progressive who comes with a number of problems that make his accession unlikely. To start with, O'Rorke's platform mostly focuses on gun control, a popular topic among Democrats, but ultimately not even close to the top of the priority list for independent voters whose priorities focus more towards the economy. This isn't a run killer, but what may be is O'Rorke's ungraceful exit in the previous Democratic race, which saw O'Rorke endorsing Biden (A much better candidate) and leaving the race apparently exhausted. It's unlikely he'd be able to carry it through to the end and there seems to be little chance of him trying again.
Another progressive candidate, Bernie Sanders is unlikely given that he left the Democratic party to run as an independent, and is unlikely to either return or succeed on an independent ticket regardless of his policies.
This leaves only two candidates. Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama.
Both of these have major problems that make it unlikely that they will beat Trump.
First and foremost is the political dynasty problem.
The American people do not like political dynasties and it's highly likely that to an extent, the omnipresence of the Bush and Clinton dynasties in the 1990s and 2000s was a big contributing factor to the election of first Obama and then Trump.
The fact that these two are both wives of former presidents comes off as insulting to a nation that bases a lot of it's identity around anti-monarchical and anti-aristocratic rhetoric.
The problems with Michelle Obama are fewer than Clinton, but just to reiterate, Clinton comes off as pretentious and entitled. Her "Why aren't I 50 points ahead?" comment and anger after the election at winning the popular vote but not the electoral college did much more damage to American politics than most democrats would like to admit as it in part helped to legitimise the further rejection of election results by Trump in 2020 and potential escalation of that rhetoric if Trump is to lose again in 2024. She is detested and also aging quite rapidly.
Michelle Obama suffers from none of these issues, and the Obamas have the advantage of not being well known as race baiters (some of their supporters have race baited for them but it's a much MUCH lesser aspect of their careers.)
However, Michelle Obama if elected would essentially solidify the idea of an Obama political dynasty, and to top it off, she has made absolutely NO noise around the idea of running in the first place, making her extremely unlikely.
Those two are easily the two most likely candidates, but there are a number of minor candidates that also merit a discussion.
To start with, Beto O'Rorke. A progressive who comes with a number of problems that make his accession unlikely. To start with, O'Rorke's platform mostly focuses on gun control, a popular topic among Democrats, but ultimately not even close to the top of the priority list for independent voters whose priorities focus more towards the economy. This isn't a run killer, but what may be is O'Rorke's ungraceful exit in the previous Democratic race, which saw O'Rorke endorsing Biden (A much better candidate) and leaving the race apparently exhausted. It's unlikely he'd be able to carry it through to the end and there seems to be little chance of him trying again.
Another progressive candidate, Bernie Sanders is unlikely given that he left the Democratic party to run as an independent, and is unlikely to either return or succeed on an independent ticket regardless of his policies.
This leaves only two candidates. Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama.
Both of these have major problems that make it unlikely that they will beat Trump.
First and foremost is the political dynasty problem.
The American people do not like political dynasties and it's highly likely that to an extent, the omnipresence of the Bush and Clinton dynasties in the 1990s and 2000s was a big contributing factor to the election of first Obama and then Trump.
The fact that these two are both wives of former presidents comes off as insulting to a nation that bases a lot of it's identity around anti-monarchical and anti-aristocratic rhetoric.
The problems with Michelle Obama are fewer than Clinton, but just to reiterate, Clinton comes off as pretentious and entitled. Her "Why aren't I 50 points ahead?" comment and anger after the election at winning the popular vote but not the electoral college did much more damage to American politics than most democrats would like to admit as it in part helped to legitimise the further rejection of election results by Trump in 2020 and potential escalation of that rhetoric if Trump is to lose again in 2024. She is detested and also aging quite rapidly.
Michelle Obama suffers from none of these issues, and the Obamas have the advantage of not being well known as race baiters (some of their supporters have race baited for them but it's a much MUCH lesser aspect of their careers.)
However, Michelle Obama if elected would essentially solidify the idea of an Obama political dynasty, and to top it off, she has made absolutely NO noise around the idea of running in the first place, making her extremely unlikely.
