Who is Dem's strongest candidate for 2024 among these options ?

[prag_prog]

Let's say Biden announces he isn't running for re-election. Assuming economy is normal in 2024 (nothing great, nothing bad type economy), which of these Dems do you think have best shot at winning presidency ?

[prag_prog]

I like Pete the most but I think Whitmer might be the strongest. I am afraid of Pete being gay dragging down his chances among socially conservative Dems, Indies. Kamala just seems very polarizing based on her favorables. Whitmer has been decently popular governor in a swing state, doesn't seem to be too polarizing and will also massively increase Dem's chances of winning Michigan.

[Kleine Scheiße]

pete's chances are underrated but the answer is probably whitmer

[President Johnson]

Gavin Newsom. Charismatic, good at messaging and fighter attitude. He's also looking presidential, what is still factor although it shouldn't.

Whitmer is second. She and Newsom would also make a good ticket.

[prag_prog]

pete's chances are underrated but the answer is probably whitmer

I do like Pete the most as a candidate but my worries about Pete come from whether him being a gay will impact his electability among socially conservative Dems, Indies or not

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Newsom. Whitmer will be tarred with the same "Schoolmarm" brush they used against Clinton and Warren, and her Covid policies will come back to bite her. Newsom has that last liability as well, but he seems to get less flack for it. And he doesn't seem to get the Berners nearly as angry as Buttigieg does.

But really, if these are the choices, just ask Al Gore if he wants a glide path to the Presidency.

[Vice President Christian Man]

I like Pete the most but I think Whitmer might be the strongest. I am afraid of Pete being gay dragging down his chances among socially conservative Dems, Indies. Kamala just seems very polarizing based on her favorables. Whitmer has been decently popular governor in a swing state, doesn't seem to be too polarizing and will also massively increase Dem's chances of winning Michigan.

There's few anti-gay Dems left but I agree that Whitmer's the strongest. Newsom may get a slight boost due to his failed recall attempt but both Buttigieg and Harris turn off the WWC voters that are necessary to win, Buttigieg moreso than Harris.

[Skill and Chance]

Yikes I think they all clearly do worse than Biden!

Maybe Whitmer, assuming she gets a 2nd term and has some new accomplishments?

I think their best bets would be Kelly or Beshear if they win reelection, or Wes Moore assuming he wins.  I think they could benefit greatly from running a relative outsider in federal politics.

[SnowLabrador]

I think Newsom, he has the best messaging. It's long past time the Democrats adopted freedom as part of their platform.

[BlueSwan]

Would love for it to be Pete, but he's probably still too young and too gay for 2024.

Whitmer seems like a fairly strong candidate, but frankly in a poll like this I have to vote for the handsome straight white guy. Unfortunately, superficial stuff like this still matters, but even those factors aside, I think Newsom checks most boxes.

[Illiniwek]

1a. Whitmer (fairly successful governor of rust belt state; done well to overcome negativity of COVID lockdown; very likable personality)
1b. Newsom (I like him for all the reasons previously mentioned, but I think the stink of being from California won't do him well in any of the battleground states)
2. Buttigieg (I like him but the voters won't, but I still think he would do sufficiently better than Harris)
3. Harris (just nope)

[Yoda]

Whitmer for all of the reasons others have posted above, but also b/c she will be able to speak from personal experience to one of the biggest problems the country is currently facing: rising right wing terrorism and political violence.

The kidnapping plot didn't get a lot of national play (certainly not as much as if the situation was reversed) and it will help her attack whichever fascist the repubs end up nominating, be it DeSantis or trump, as they both encourage those kinds of plots with their rhetoric of stolen elections and globalist world orders.

[Senator Incitatus]

Whitmer by default. Harris is a disaster and Buttigieg still lost in a relatively weak field of candidates; either would lose badly to Newsom or Whitmer, unless I'm missing something. Whitmer beats Newsom by virtue of his record, despite his personal ability as a campaigner.

[Lechasseur]

1. Whitmer
2. Newsom
3. Buttigieg
4. Harris

[dw93]

1. Whitmer: She has the least liabilities of all the names mentioned, is a relatively popular governor of a swing state in the rust belt, and as Yoda said, can speak from personal experience with regard to the problem of rising right wing terrorism and political violence.

GAP

2. Newsom: Is a great messenger and a fighter. That said, the stench of being from California is too strong for not just the rust belt, but also enough moderate suburbs in the sunbelt. People on this forum need to understand California has the same stench Massachusetts had 30-40 years ago when it comes to national electoral politics. Plus, the homelessness in California is gonna be an issue for him both in the primaries and the general.

GAP

3. Harris: Like Newsom has the stench of being from California, but lacks the fight and messaging that he has. While she wasn't the worst pick Biden could've made in 2020 and while she didn't hurt him on the campaign (I'd even say she was a net plus, given her VP debate performance) she hasn't proven thus far to be the best governing partner to the President. On top of that, she's comes off as very bland and awkward and that doesn't sell well.

4. Buttigieg: The fact that he did as well as he did in the 2020 primaries is more of an indication of how weak the 2020 Democratic Primary field was as a whole than it was an sign of exceptional political talent on the part of Pete. Socially Conservative Black and Latino voters wouldn't turn out for a gay candidate and he'd have no other constituency to make up for that lack of turnout. With that in mind, he's the only candidate of these options, and one of few Democrats in general, I can see losing Michigan.  On top of that, the guy just comes off as a smarmy pompous ass and is a flip flopper to boot.

[TDAS04]

I’d say Whitmer, but I’m not sure.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Lol Biden is running even if we lose the H because we only need 270 not 400

[Hope For A New Era]

Yikes I think they all clearly do worse than Biden!

Maybe Whitmer, assuming she gets a 2nd term and has some new accomplishments?

I think their best bets would be Kelly or Beshear if they win reelection, or Wes Moore assuming he wins.  I think they could benefit greatly from running a relative outsider in federal politics.

Not sure how good Beshear would be as a presidential candidate, but I do think he's pretty much the ideal running mate for a hypothetical Harris presidential candidacy. The only possibility who might be better is Jared Golden.

Which Kelly do you mean?

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

Whitmer and it's not even close.

[Ferguson97]

Whitmer easily.

She's a semi-popular governor from a Midwestern swing state, she's young, conventionally attractive, and doesn't come across as a woke, out-of-touch elitist.

[Spectator]

Whitmer by default.

[clever but short]

I'm ready to be piled on for this, and this is basically just vibes, but here's my ranking:

Whitmer >>>> Harris > Buttigieg > Newsom

I think that Newsom is vastly overrated right now. I don't think there's a good "governor of an infamously blue state who is popular with libs for owning the cons" path.

Buttigieg is unelectable on the federal level for the forseeable future, not because of his sexuality, but because of his lack of experience and the widespread perception of him as smarmy and a 'beltway insider.' ('Insider' candidates can win elections — see HRC winning the popular vote and Biden winning both the popular vote and electoral college — but being perceived as an 'insider' while also being young and relatively inexperienced is a particularly toxic combination for a candidate.)

I don't think that Buttigieg is categorically unelectable per se. But thank you for so succinctly stating his main problems, which I find much more detrimental than the hypothesis that swing voters will just never ever ever vote for a gay guy.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

4. Buttigieg: The fact that he did as well as he did in the 2020 primaries is more of an indication of how weak the 2020 Democratic Primary field was as a whole than it was an sign of exceptional political talent on the part of Pete. Socially Conservative Black and Latino voters wouldn't turn out for a gay candidate and he'd have no other constituency to make up for that lack of turnout. With that in mind, he's the only candidate of these options, and one of few Democrats in general, I can see losing Michigan.  On top of that, the guy just comes off as a smarmy pompous ass and is a flip flopper to boot.

I thought we had many good candidates. We had over twenty candidates on our side, of which many would have been viable in my opinion. We had major players such as Biden, Bloomberg, Sanders, plus we had Klobuchar, Booker, Harris, Gillibrand, Inslee, etc.

Or maybe I'm too optimistic, which could be the case.