And what a lovely problem it is! Three fierce women and I would happily vote for any of them.

I wonder if Rachel will have Amy on her show tonight?

AND I hope the media stays more focused on the atrocities being done each day rather than on nitpicking about candidates (of any party) running for 2020.

Kamala should go fly a kite?

have now forgotten

I am not playing the games here. I see nothing has changed since 16.🙄

???

That sounds like the very definition of confusion imo.

must’ve been something REALLY important...

I read this somewhere (JPR).

There is a shadowy Third Way Plan. Phase one: the MSM and we here on DU ("Brockbots" ) will keep attacking Warren and Gabbard, try to connect them with the Virginia situation, go after Klobuchar until they all drop out of the race. Phase two: the narrative will pivot to the 100th anniversary of women's right to vote and it's time for a woman president and Kamala (they call her "Scamala" -- they love their little Trumpian nicknames over there!) will be the anointed candidate.

Or maybe it's the usual about being a "corporate shill" and putting everyone in jail. Whatever it is: WRONG.

JPR is getting is getting a little cra!

We Brockbots now?

Sweet...they are calling her Scamala now. Guess they are scared of her as donnie does the same when he fears the competition. Wonder who they are scared for...

He must be broke by now.

There is a lot of skill in it.
It is a great stress reducer and it is fun.
I love to get a bunch of cheap kites and take them to the lake. I get each one airborne and find a kid to hand it to and then get the next one up and hand it off, etc.
Oh the smiles I have received!

Wtf?

I've seen no such flaws in Warren, other than ginned up bullsh*t, but beyond her fiscal policy, I know little about what her foreign policy might be. Brown is my sleeper...strong union support for years. He would absolutely wreck the GOP in the upper midwest.

running is sending off alarm bells. Hm. Every one of them.

Coincidence?

We know better.

in Minnesota. Most of us vote for her because, even though she's disappointing, she's better than today's Republicans. But we'd also like to vote for someone in 2020 whose major qualification isn't just "Not Trump".

If you want to protect the status quo, Amy is your candidate.

http://www.startribune.com/winning-progressive-votes-could-be-a-challenge-for-klobuchar/505687862/

I am waiting to here from them all.

Frankly, I could live with most, if not all, of the declared Democrats should one of them win the White House, even if none of them are my preference.

I will not be looking to Our Revolution for guidance to make my choice.

eliminate mandatory sentencing guidelines.

and it would change my view of her to a large extent

Republican, Rand Paul of all people, last year.
Saw them both interviewed on it on TV.
and she was talking and tweeting about the legalization issue the last week or so.

She also said we need to acknowledge that certain communities distrust police.
She wants to imprison violent criminals, not the non-violent.
She's personally opposed to death penalty; as DA, she never pursued it.

Harris when SF Attorney Gen. refused to prosecute incumbent Treasury Sec'y Steve Mnuchin for gross violation of his bank, OneWest, for making fortunes on more than 36,000 foreclosures on its sub-prime mortgage loans between 2006-15. Subsequently, Harris received a donation from Mnuchin for her 2016 Senate race.
Klobuchar earned a harsh rebuke from Senate majority leader, Harry Reid for gross abuse of her office staff. Klobuchar excuses
the abuse charges because of being a highly driven achiever.
Of course it's too early yet. We must wait to kick over all the stones to see what is crawling underneath.

The HuffPo story only noted that anonymous sources said Harry Reid spoke to her privately. The story went on to note that Reid's spokesman said the senator prefers not to discuss private conversation, and that Reid doesn't remember whether or not he had this discussion with Klobuchar. Then the story quoted Reid directly: “Sen. Klobuchar is one of the most brilliant, hardest-working members of the Senate, and I was glad to serve alongside her,” said Reid. “She’s tireless when it comes to fighting for the people of Minnesota and the country, and that’s why she’s such a popular Senator back home and among her colleagues.”

A private conversation presumably means it was just Reid & Klobuchar, wouldn't you think? I'm curious how the sources would even know what was said in a private conversation, much less how harsh it was.

I'm not saying it didn't happen; it may well have, and Reid was being diplomatic in saying he didn't remember it. I'm just cautioning against embroidering what was factually reported.

third hand source. The Reid rebuke was accompanied by moderating comments about how brilliant Klobuchar is and how hard she works. Nevertheless, her record in the Senate of having the most turnover of staff verified by reports of abuse from former staff members is alarming.

Link: https://projects.propublica.org/represent/members/H001075-kamala-harris/compare-votes/W000817-elizabeth-warren/115

...don't have a clue what they're talking about. They just base their opinion on perception.

We've seen how easy it is to undo executive orders. Keep the "lefties" in Congress to do liberal legislation. Put a Democrat in the White House who will implement and execute.

I would be happy to have Harris, Klobuchar, or Warren in our White House. Happier still to see a big blue tidal wave keep the House and take the Senate along with the WH.

Not enough to withhold my vote in the general, but I would probably write-in a better candidate in the primary if I had to.

Right now Brown is one of my "better candidates".

I am hoping by the time my primary comes around, Harris and Gabbard will have faded. They are both highly suspect on an issue important to me. On Klobuchar, I still need to do more research, but I know of at least one "sin of omission" ... that will hopefully be overridden by other facts of her record.

I’m thinking she won’t want to drop investigations for crimes. I’ve leaned toward almost every one of the candidates so far except Tulsi Gabbard.

All of the GOP candidates from 2016 were terrible candidates, and the worst of them stole the election.

I would have no problem voting for any of the declared Demcoratic candidates.

I may be on the moderate wing of DU although I call myself a Social Democrat and have problems with Browns trade Rhetoric. But he is from Ohio and is strong Union.

If he were to get our nomination we would win in a landslide. Especially with Harris or Booker on the ticket. He would wrap up the Midwest like no other democrat and I think could win here in Florida.

I am curious about him. I would like to hear what he has to say.

Thought if he could win a tough re-election in Ohio which he easily did, he would be our best choice.

Remember, at the end of the day, the best Democratic candidate is the one that can win!

I like them all, but right now Brown is my favorite. Strong union guy and someone (in my opinion) who would intimidate tRump. Time will tell.

I think Klobuchar seems so likeable that Trump would have a really hard time making her look bad.

My choices are a little different but honestly, I will vote for whoever ends up on top.
There is only one that I am actively rooting against and hope I don’t have to hold my nose to vote for her.

yet. It's going to be a tough one.

I'd like to see him at the top of a National Recovery ticket, committed to a single term, with any of those three as a running mate. Any of those three women would make a great POTUS, IMO.

.

Biden/Brown???????

Dream ticket, but as long as Biden is at the head of the ticket Very important, someone pointed out that Biden is the only
one of the declared candidates to have foreign relations credentials.

I think that says something about voters wanting new faces with new ideas. Why two men when there are so many intelligent qualified women?

If Obama hadn't resurrected Biden's career by selecting him as VP, almost nobody would think it wise to nominate him (prone to gaffes, even older than Trump, twice fallen way short of getting nominated, Thomas-Hill hearing past, etc.).

And this notion that we must nominate a white male (never mind 2 white males) is very misguided. See post #125.

With very few exceptions (so far), I will still have no problem voting for the eventual candidate, regardless of which one of them wins the primary. There are a couple for whom I might have to hold my nose while casting my vote, but they're still head and shoulders above the asshole they're trying to unseat.

Picking one will be hard. I am going to wait awhile and see how it goes.

Being from CA, I know Harris best.

Currently I am ignoring the negative posts, (one person here seems to have had one for all announced so far) and content to wait for them to all get through the initial introductory stage. Once we get to the debates then we should have a clear top tier, basically the creme will rise.

That being said, I don't really have one that sticks out as horrible, (one minor candidate and Schultz, but no need to go negative) which is good. I don't see a John Edwards in the group, someone who set off major alarms for me but sold the progressive persona.

So, hard choices are good, let's allow this to play out and force the media to cover this fairly.

While driving today there was some lady on with Nicole Wallace who did it right. The Repuke guests were playing the "too far left meme," she called them out! You can't say Warren's tax plan is supported by 70% polled and then turn around and say she is too far left! RIGHT!!! If too far left is 70% of the polled population then you are full of shit or you are admitting that you are working for 5 to 10% of the population that is too far right.

Too early yet. Good choices though. I can do without repigs dirty illegal tricks. It's Repigs who need to go. Haven't done one thing for the citizens.

I don't know much about her. The snow thing was odd to me but I get that the optics worked for people from other parts of the country. Anyway, Sen AK definitely has a swagger about her and I'm curious to learn more.

It had people talking. She's not my preferred candidate, but I think that was a smart move.

...riding the season out here. I am loving Dem Women a lot -- I am not loving the snarling and backbiting and trolling that has already begun here. I mean, did you know (breathless horrified whisper) that Kamala Harris was in no way a "progressive" prosecutor? I heard it here, so it must be true. >sigh<

All I know for real is that Dem Women are The Best. Solidarity, Sisters!

Someone said Kamala should go fly a kite.They meant, FO...

My post was to send her soaring!

Mary Poppins. Silly perhaps....or perhaps not.. I love this scene.

It's way too early to make a final decision on anyone yet. But I'm willing to give every candidate a fair listen. When our party selects its nominee next year, I pledge to support her/him with my vote and whatever time I can volunteer. Until then the field is wide open and we have a very large tent.

I have been saying that since 2016 - that while some said "we had no one," I felt we had so many great candidates it would be hard to choose!

I am still loving Kamala, and thinking of the rest as potential running mates for her, but I have the feeling I will be happy with whoever claims the nomination.

th

...jump in (in almost my preferred order, subject to change):

Klobuchar
Booker
Harris
Castro

I also have a few that I've already tossed, whether they've announced or not.

Mine were the first three. They made an impression on me. Way to early yet. I am going to listen hard to what they all have to say.

every candidate has some minor flaws.

I noticed you asked for links from the person who thought Kamala should go fly a kite.

I'm sure you know these, and forgive me if I'm telling you what you already know, but:

https://votesmart.org/ is a really good site for looking at what candidates have actually done. It also has links to their websites, bios, speeches, and ratings from various groups on issues. It also has a 'political courage' rating under 'positions.'

https://www.opensecrets.org/ is where to find how much money their campaigns have received and from whom. I like it because it gives the percent of funds coming from small donors. I always look at that.

I usually also look at each candidates' website, obviously, and research articles that have been written about them. Now, I like to see negative articles from the right because that shows our person has gravitas - judge a person by the quality of her enemies, as it were. And by where they stand on the Green New Deal (my grandkids need that now), healthcare and social security. Those are my issues.

Now, about Kamala - I don't think she should go fly a kite, but to my mind (as an economist) she's a bit weak on fiscal and monetary policy. Nothing else about her scares me.

I've said this before, but Booker's opponents will try and tar him with Wall Street affiliations.

Klobuchar is a good candidate - I haven't looked deeply into her positions as yet.

Gillibrand will not enjoy my support in the primary but I will obviously support her fervently if she is our nominee. Hope not, though, for Franken's sake.

I don't know much about Castro except that he has very little executive experience.

I love Warren because I'm a fiscal and monetary policy wonk, and she totally gets it. I'd rather she stay in the Senate though, because ultimately I think she will get more done there - to my mind she's taken over as the Lion of the Senate from Teddy (or Lioness, we should say). The Wall Street lizards, corporate shareholder primacy people, MIC and billionaire parasites all absolutely hate her, so that's very encouraging.

Bloomberg...no. I agree with AOC on that. A society that allows billionaires is immoral.

I like Sherrod Brown. Very solid progressive. He'd be great.

Biden...no. The 2005 bankruptcy law he supported betrayed our children and grandchildren and is helping to make them debt slaves. In my state alone, 733,700 people owe an average of $35,000 in student loan debt and are remitting an aggregate of $2.7 billion a year that is leaving our state, not being used to purchase local goods and services, and even worse, about 85,000 people are in default - they can't buy or sell cars or homes, their wages are garnished forever, the loan principal keeps growing and their credit is ruined. They don't get tax refunds, and their schools won't release transcripts. And, due to this law, THEY CAN NEVER GET RELIEF FROM THESE DEBTS THROUGH BANKRUPTCY. Biden did this to our children and grandchildren and I will actively oppose him tooth and nail. Plus, he was a good ol' boy in the Anita Hill hearings. My wife dislikes him for that, though I'm not happy with it either. He was a good VP for Obama, but...no.

Tulsi Gabbard - many people around her really seem to dislike her, it seems for her foreign policy leanings, and for her unfortunate anti-LGBTQ stances through about 2010, when she 'evolved' on gay rights as did so many others. Pardon my cynicism.

Beto? He kind of went like John Lennon for awhile, but he's getting his mojo back with that Trump demonstration down in El Paso. Like Obama, Beto is new and untried. I sure like the way he talks thought.

Bernie? Well, I was a huge Bernie supporter in the bitter 2016 primaries. I'd rather he not run this time because others have picked up his torch, and he unfortunately (and somewhat unjustly to my mind) has been tarred with racism, or at least a cavalier attitude toward social justice as opposed to economic justice.

In the meantime we should all be ready - the right wing will be working really, really hard 24/7/365 to ridicule, discredit and divide us around candidates, and in my 60 years I've seen us be stupid and fall for that far more often than I've seen us stick it out and stick together.

As Obama said - we cannot allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good.

I was not the poster of 'go fly a kite' who has since deleted the post. Don't even try to hang that one on me, friend.

I wasn't even thinking of you when I made this rather long-winded post. Seemed like sheshe asked for links from somebody, I thought it was Joet.

Doesn't matter, really. We all have our opinions about the candidates, and we're all free to have them. I know quite a few people might disagree with me on Biden, and they are free to do that. Biden would definitely be better than Trump, but I've seen so very many millennials who have just been buried under mountains of student debt and it is sick. Biden was wrong for supporting that law then, and he's still wrong now.

Since you mentioned it, and in case you didn't know. So was Warren, although I think she was late in the game and didn't step on a soapbox about it...sounded more like she went along, since the others did.

I am fully aware that I am letting personal relations color my stance on this, but in the primaries I will support no Senator among those who urged Al to resign without a full, public, and sincere apology. If no candidate of my preference runs, I will sit the primaries out, and watch from the sidelines. I'm not interested in doing the Republicans' work for them (liked so many "Democrats" did in 2016, e.g.), so I have no interest in trashing one declared Democrat after another. SOMEbody will get our nomination, and I will not take part in making them damaged goods before the 2020 fall campaign begins.

I will absolutely support our nominee for President, of course, there is no question on that. But in the primaries, the mob hit on Al is a deal killer for me.

I view it as making them ineligible to be President, because I think the early ones did it because they thought it was good for their upcoming Presidential run....it took a strong, possible contender out of the running. Some of the public had been asking Franken to run. Also, Franken was stealing thunder at hearings and being asked to appear on talk shows. Also, it got the first ones on the news and talk shows.

Second, it was obvious it was a Republican manipulation from the start. So it was naive for them to fall for it. (Look at who called immediately for Northam to resign, before all the facts were known,and even though Northam is a state-elected official, out of the jurisdiction of any of the Dems running for President.)

Third, the behavior complained of wasn't criminal, and a couple were jokes or nothing inappropriate, like the hand around the waist. The reaction was overkill and the ouster was unfair.

Note: Beto and Klochuchar are, I think, the only possible Presidential candidates who didn't immediately jump in on demanding Northam resign. That shows independent thinking, IMO. Maybe they weren't asked. But the others weren't all asked.

Falling for a manipulated Republican scheme is a dangerous item to have on a Democratic presidential resumé. It raises the question as to whether they will be vulnerable to future scams from Fox and other Republican dirty tricks organizations. I want a president who questions such scams and the motives behind them as a matter of course. If I wanted a president who lets himself be manipulated by Fox Noise, well, hell, we have that already.

He gave it time and thought. He was no fool to immediately react publicly to situations. He was hard to manipulate.

They think their own perverted meaning of the word is the only one, but in English (as opposed to Republicanese), "conservative (small c)" just means taking a cautious approach to things, and Obama was nothing if not that. Even Democrats often refer to the "conservative" media, when there is, in fact, no such thing.

In Republicanese, of course, "a Conservative" means a hateful, jealous, intolerant, fearful, angry Republican with an inferiority complex.

I thought it was odd that people were surprised by some of his moderate stances, since I thought he'd shown he was moderate all through the campaign, except fr a couple of positions.

I miss him.

….Dems come out first..providing they didnt get there via dirty tricks or bullying tactics. I have to LIKE them. If I dont like them I will hold my nose and vote....but I will still vote Dem. We all need to pinky promise.....

There is not one DEMOCRAT that in the last, final vote I would have to hold my nose for. Not one. I vote Democratic. Period.

Fingers off the nose. Eyes are always on the prize.

Kamala Harris could be uniquely positioned to take a dominating lead early on. Especially if she does well in the first few primaries. It's all speculation at this point, but she just may be the right person at the right time and from the right place.


As much as I like Elizabeth Warren and of course would be happy to vote for her if she was the nominee, I would love to see her be Treasury Secretary and scare the living shit out of the financial criminals that are ruining the country for 90% of us.

Article 1: https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/the-blue-wave-was-propelled-by-black-voters-survey-finds

I'm looking forward to seeing this all shake out.

It will be interesting to see how they interact and react when challenged with something other than blithering, blundering Republicans.

I slipped a little bit on one of the first ones to declare, but I recovered.

Dems only, of course.

and I could happily vote for almost any of the declared and probably-to-be-declared candidates. Obviously I'd vote for whichever Dem got the nomination, but unless the field gets winnowed down quite a bit by next year, it will be really hard to make a choice. I wouldn't support Gabbard or Gillibrand in the primaries but I could go for any of the others. The question is what to do when these good people start running against each other (and I hope nobody goes negative).

when she advocated for marijuana legalization as she proudly declared her Jamaican heritage. I love her and do so more every day. I'll vote of course for our nominee, but she is my true choice.

Loving her as well.

To early yet, however I like her a lot.

Waiting for more from all. This is going to be interesting.

To early yet I have my favorites.

Just read that Beto had a huge crowd tonight. Far larger than the Moran.

Hugs.

In fact, with that ticket, I think we could see 60+ percent turnout, which we haven't seen since the '60s.

It has been a long time since we have had a Democratic ticket without East Coast representation. I think Clinton-Gore was the last one. Johnson-Humphrey was the last Democratic ticket with both candidates being from west of the Mississippi (Humphrey just barely). The west-southwest combo of Harris-O'Rourke would be a new color in the rainbow. For that matter, Klobuchar-O'Rourke would duplicate the Johnson-Humphrey distribution, if in reverse.

We should also beware of gutting our Senate roster. If a Senator from Massachusetts or Ohio should become President, a Republican governor will pick their replacement in the Senate. We will need to flip a great number of Senate seats if we let one or two slide in that manner.

...that we simply cannot afford to give up a Senate seat. We're already at such a major disadvantage.

That is a six year term I would hate to have shortened. Ohio Senate seats are not easy for us to win.

Though, like you, that is not the only reason for me either.

I think just getting to 50 seats will be a tall order. I'm much more confident about taking back the White House.

The wind is blowing in our favor, but the wind can change on a dime. We need to field not just good candidates, but EXCELLENT candidates. We need a lot of Mark Kellys, and charismatic moderate candidates in states where no other Democrat stands a chance. We need Senate candidates with Kelly's resumé, Beto's charisma, Klobuchar's attention to detail, and Cory Booker's intensity. And we need lots of them. The Republicans will be putting up the fight of their lives, because if they lose their majority in the Senate, they lose their last bastion of power to stem the rising Democratic tide, and they see this as their Alamo. We will see dirty tricks and "coincidental accidents" happening to Democratic Senate candidates like we haven't seen in years. "Don't take any small private planes" will not just be a cynical joke this time. It's a warning I'd take quite seriously, because I'm sure the Republicans do.

More than half the states are stark red. And before long, 2/3rds of the population will be represented by 1/3rd of the Senate. John Dingell said we need to get rid of the Senate, and he's right. We should also expand the House.

The smaller colonies wanted some assurance that they would't be de facto voted into either irrelevance or subjugation by the larger colonies, so when they became states, they insisted on the Senate as a way of evening out the playing field.

Of course, no one in 1787 imagined a state like Wyoming having the same number of Senators as a state with 64 times as many inhabitants, or their electoral votes being almost 4 times as representative as those of California.

In 1787, the west coast was split between the Spaniards, the Russians and the British, and the most daring expansion westward was Jefferson borrowing money from Britain to make the Louisiana Purchase from France. We can't fault the founding fathers for not imagining today's population distribution. We CAN fault today's legislators for refusing to adapt to it.

When the largest had maybe 13 times as many people as the smallest and the overall population was relatively low, it wasn't the atrocity it is now. Like the electoral college, it is in many ways a vestige of slavery. Disproportionate power without having to count fellow human beings as human beings.

the kind of virulence here that we saw in the 2016 primary.

Lol....already happening.

However I am in it to win.

I want to fly a kite
Up to the highest height...

With tuppence for paper and strings
You can have your own set of wings
With your feet on the ground
You're a bird in a flight
With your fist holding tight
To the string of your kite
Oh, oh, oh!
Let's go fly a kite
Up to the highest height!
Let's go fly a kite and send it soaring
Up through the atmosphere
Up where the air is clear
Oh, let's go fly a kite!
When you send it flyin' up there
All at once you're lighter than air
You can dance on the breeze
Over 'ouses and trees
With your…

They are all pro-choice, pro-Social Security, pro-Medicare, etc. So no problems there.

But I don't see any who appeal to me or who I think can win (meaning I don't see some as having appeal across the country in the states that we need to win).

Harris - I think she is an urban, coast candidate. I don't know if she would appeal to the average Democrat in the Wisconsin-Michigan-Ohio area. Maybe Florida, though. She was on the Franken ouster train, though, and also jumped on Northam ouster before all the facts were known, and despite him being a state-elected official not in her state.

Warren - I don't think she can win, esp with the Native American issue. I think that will continue to attach to her. It's just an odd thing that will be distracting, on top of her appeal mainly to urban coast Democrats, but not so much across the country.

Gillibrand - Nope. I don't think she has much of a chance. She's not memorable or anything that a Presidential candidate needs to be. And she was the face of the Franken ouster movement. (Harris, Sherrod Brown, and Warren also signed on to that ouster campaign.)

Klobuchar - Maybe. I don't know enough about her. There are allegations she was abusive to staff. So we need to hear about that, and find out whether this is a Republican manipulation tactic. One story is that she three a binder at a staffer. If true, that's a problem. But this needs to be cleared up. To her credit, she did not jump on the oust-Franken train. That makes her a leader in the sense that she does what she thinks is right, rather than what's popular at the time or what may be best for her politically.

Biden - I agree with another poster about the bankruptcy issue with him. Also, his age is an issue because of the age he'll be in 2024.

Brown - I don't know enough about him. He would appeal to Democrats across the country, though, I think. Both coasters and mid-country. He was on the Franken ouster train, though. And he jumped on the Northam ouster train before all the facts were even known, and despite Northam being a state-elected official, not in Brown's state.

Beto - He hasn't announced, but I'm interested. Don't know enough about him. He's very green for a Presidential race. But he gets me more excited than any of the others.

Gov. Bullock - He hasn't announced, and I don't know much about him. But I'm interested, since he's a Governor and actually got conservatives to vote for him in his state, while remaining a Democrat. He would have appeal in the mid-U.S., including Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio area, I think. But he might be too moderate. He's an unknown.

I'm especially impressed by the women who are currently contenders.

It's going to be difficult to decide among them, so I'm like you. I'll be waiting to see what they propose and how they propose those things.

An embarrassment of riches!

Though Bennet has lately been making a strong impression

Right now, it is nice to see the numerous entries into the race for the Democratic nomination, but for me, it is way too early make a choice. Time will sort out who winds up with 2%, and who winds up with 42%, and this will emerge through the process of competition that will take place between now and next Spring. I eagerly await the process, and will put off making a choice until later.

occasionally for another year, but that's all. And imo, all polls before then are garbage polls for all purposes but those of political players trying to monitor the situation.

I was impressed by Rachel Maddow's admiration for someone too midwest for me to pay real attention to before, Amy Klobuchar. I respect Rachel and thus anyone she wants me to notice, and announcing in the snow was a good "visual." But I'll still wait to read the book once it's written.

It's a good day to be a Democrat.

In fact, not everyone has committed. I want to see the candidates on the campaign trail, then see how they handle all the pressures that will come their way. The debating cycle is also important to me to determine who can really think on their feet, make an argument, take no prisoners.

For me, it's just too early. But I have my favorites. That being said, I'm wide open to being surprised by someone who could blow it straight out of the water.

Right now, from the people who have announced? Kamala Harris is at the top of the my favorite list.

We shall see!

After decades of dudes, that would be so awesome!

got plenty of time to hear how they differ and what the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate are. There's no hurry too make a decision now.

It is going to be a hard choice since we have so many excellent people running. Does my heart good to see them and their love for our country.

get it, you were pointing out the plethora of fine democratic candidates. An "embarrassment of riches," so to speak.