President Elizabeth Warren?

This Would Be A Godsend To America.

I'd prefer Bernie Sanders but I would vote for Elizabeth Warren over Hillary Clinton any day.

I have liked her since day one. It does seem she is being groomed quite well to move on to bigger and better things in politics.

---

Don't get me wrong, I think Clinton would be a great President. But Elizabeth Warren would be PHENOMENAL. She's the kind of person who would never back down to Wall Street or hide her views on things to protect big money. It would be an amazing thing for someone like that, the type of person the White House has never seen, to take over this country.

And not to mention, the GOP would totally shlt their pants.

I think if Clinton has to debate either Warren or Sanders her lock on the White House will not be such a sure thing.

I don't trust Hillary at all and refuse to vote for her. She is just too fickle on issues that matter to me.

I am just sick of people telling me I should vote for Hillary because she's a woman and I'm a woman. (My response is 'there are better women out there'. (I love Jennifer Granholm, but she was born in Canada, even though she grew up here, she's ineligible to ever be President. I also love Warren, but unfortunately, she's unelectable-she's too liberal for most people. She'd be my top choice but I am fairly certain people from certain areas of the country think of her as an uppity New England liberal.)

I'll vote for the Green Party candidate before I cast a vote for Hillary.

Clinton-Warren is the most likely possibility, although pairing Clinton with Cory Booker might be stronger in terms of getting out the vote.

Clinton is more likely to get the crossover votes from moderates and disaffected Republicans than Warren, who will light a fire over liberals who are disappointed in Obama. But Warren will frighten the disaffected Republicans into sticking with the GOP.

The GOP is a mess, with social conservatives hating big-business conservatives and libertarians surging into leads with a Rand Paul who is willing to turn 180 degrees away from any position he has previously held in order to get the nomination.

Rand Paul's Machiavellian endgame is to woo the "youth vote"--all the 20-somethings who came out for Obama in 2008 and are disappointed now because the news says the stock market is booming but they can't pay their college loans or get out of their barista jobs. If Rand Paul can persuade them that he is their messiah, any Democrat would be in big trouble.

---

There are people in their 20s and 30s (cough cough) who are equally dissatisfied with the Democratic party and for whom a centrist like Portman (who works on a bipartisan platform-he has a lot of Democratic constituents) would be a welcome change.

Hillary ain't electable-too much controversy and hatred for her. The sexagenarians think she's great but I think the younger crowd doesn't like her much.

America isn't ready for a double female ticket-and Warren and Clinton aren't politically aligned. I think a female VP needs to happen first in any event. I just think Hillary is washed up and needs to let someone else in. I am not electing someone I can't believe in just because they're a woman-I've waited since I could remember for a female President. Hillary isn't who I had in mind. UGH.

(And this is coming from someone, who, as a very little girl (like 3) could go to the television and when asked identify Geraldine Ferraro ("Gewaldine Fewwawo" in my little girl voice to my mother's feminist glee!). She too wants a female president-and has begun to see that Hillary is not the right choice. (And she's in that age bracket.) Soooo...we'll see.

I think it'll be two men and maybe a female VP candidate or two.

Typically, I'm a centrist. But I won't vote for Hillary. And there's always the apathetic voters-the people who would rather not vote at all than vote for Hillary.

I don't think Rand Paul is going to get the nod over Portman. Portman has a lot of crossover support-something Paul does not.

I still think it's going to be 2 men and a female VP. Hillary couldn't close the deal before and time has not been kind.

Well, Phyllis in my post above, it is more grammatically correct because I wished to express there might only be a single candidate for VP who was a woman. However, I erred when describing the Presidential counterparts. So, the clause: "two male [Presidential] candidates and a female [Vice Presidential] candidate".

Thanks for checking the grammar. Men and women candidates don't make grammatical sense. It should be male and female as those are adjectives here.

Updated On: 10/23/14 at 12:38 PM

Hilary has name recogniton. Yes, some of that is negative but a sh!t load of people ( who actually vote) vote for the name that's familiar.

We have a mayoral race going on in Toronto where our toxic clown of an incumbent has been sidelined for that race due to health issues.( but is running for councillor in his old riding!) His bully brother ( seen often as the puppet master) is running in his stead. He joined the race late, has the same belligerent attitude and LIES outright. Yet he was polling 2nd in the race and within 6 points of the lead. The 3rd place candidate, who might actually have been the best choice has only faint hope now as most RATIONAL voters (including myself) fee lwe mus vote for the candidate who can win in order to keep that family of schweinhunds out of office.
The election is Monday - lets see what % the name recognition a-hole gets.

Portman has a lot of crossover support

He doesn't have much support at all, actually. Crossover from where to where?

---