See How They Run: An Overview of the Crowded Field of Democrats that are Running for President
This article will be updated as candidates join the race or when they exit.
2020 is poised to be one of the most crowded races for President among Democrats in US history. Many are beginning to believe this group will cannibalize itself and allow Donald Trump to pull off a second term in a year in which the incumbent is perceived as vulnerable. However, history might show otherwise. In 2016 the GOP field for President was so crowded that several prominent elected officials could not even make it on the main stage. It was the most crowded race in modern US history. In the end, someone from that mob became President of the United States.
So, with a huge crowd already in the works for the Democratic nod, The Daily Blaze has decided to provide a quick overview of those announced or seem very poised to announce in the near future.
The former Vice President of the United States is often treated as an “instant frontrunner” because of his experience and credentials. Other hold a huge resentment against him for not “saving” the country from Donald Trump in 2016. He is currently undecided.
He is something that was very common a few years ago — a fairly typical, traditional, old school Democrat. In 2020, that is a dying breed.
On the upside, he has huge numbers of big money connections and is a safe alternative for those who believe the hardcore progressives in the race cannot win a general election.
On the downside, he is really old, he is the poster child of an establishment politician (he was first elected to the Senate when Richard Nixon was President), and he is most known for making spectacular gaffes at a time where such is not tolerated.
The former mayor of New York City has long fancied himself as a logical choice for the White House. The largely moderate (by Democrat standards) and independent politician is currently undecided and it is hard to say if he would run for the Democratic nomination or as an independent.
On the upside, he is a billionaire like his nemesis, Donald Trump. Fundraising would not be much of a problem. He doesn’t mind putting his money where his mouth is, with a long history of funding causes he believes in with his own money. His pet issues are gun policies and the environment.
On the downside, this guy “can’t be trusted” in the eyes of many (if not most) Democrats because of his billions and his former GOP status.
This US Senator from Ohio has been described by Politico as the liberal that “bankers could stomach.” He is, in many respects, a traditional, old school, union friendly, Democrat. He is undecided at this point.
On the upside, he is known for telling it like it is in a plainspoken (but not particularly divisive) manner. He also can win in Ohio, which is become increasingly difficult for the Democrats on a statewide basis.
On the downside, he could pop up in a restaurant in Columbus, Ohio and the vast majority would have no idea who he was. Good luck in Iowa or New Hampshire in a very crowded field. He is utterly unproven on a national stage.
The Senator from Minnesota has declared. She is famous for not having enough sense to get out from under the snow when she made her announcement (what was she thinking?).
On the upside, she is certainly a serious progressive (as are almost every Democrat from Minnesota), but still seems sensible. She has even declared the government should not be in the free college education business, which is rapidly becoming standard fare among the Democrats
On the downside, she has a reputation as a bully to her staff. Those are common on Capitol Hill, but become unacceptable these days for those running for the White House.
The former HUD Secretary is already declared.
On the upside he is wildly popular among any liberal that hears him speak, it is said. Being Hispanic, he could be a big mover for electoral change in the increasingly Blue Southwest.
On the downside, he is seen as too risk adverse for one running for the biggest job in the land. In addition, he has little following on a national scale.
One of the current Senators from New York reminds many of Hillary Clinton. In fact, she replaced Clinton in the US Senate. There was a time where this made her charmed. Today, not so much. She has established an exploratory committee.
On the upside, she knows how to relate to moderates and could have some “Red State appeal.” Her reputation in the House was as a moderate. She is also a staunch feminist, which is very necessary in the Democratic Party today.
On the downside, her move from very moderate to hard left makes her suspicious to many Democrats. In addition, many blame her for the fall of Sen. Al Franken, who was a liberal darling.
Many believed the Senator from New Jersey that just recently declared should have ran in 2016 instead. His lack of resume at that time and his broad appeal in the Democratic Party made him a logical replacement to Barack Obama.
On the upside, he loves social media and it appears to love him too. He is known as a bold speaker and a Rhodes scholar.
On the downside, he tries to project himself as a “unity candidate,” but is actually one of the most progressive in the race. His thin resume and being seen as a great outsider use to resonate, but after the last two Presidents, many Americans in both parties are concerned about “on the job” training for the highest position in the land.
The Senator from Massachusetts has declared. Many believed she is the female that should have run in 2016 in the Democratic Party. The issues the party had with Bernie would likely have not had happened with her, because the two are so similar, ideologically and she could have taken many of Clinton’s votes.
On the upside, she is bright and has solid progressive credentials. Many argue she has a story that cannot be beat.
On the downside, her “Native American” claims are ridiculous and has made her despised by many in her party and perceived as a liar outside of it. The moderate wing of the Democratic party will find her unacceptable, while even some reasonable progressives doubt her ability to win on a national stage.
The Senator from California declared with much fanfare, but has also received great scrutiny.
On the upside, she is seen as articulate and charismatic and certainly knows how to exploit the anti-Trump passions that are pervasive in the Democratic Party today.
On the downside, she has a lack of experience for someone running for such a high office. Her understanding of taxes is abysmal and her credentials as a prosecutor are suspect.
Sanders is the “Eveready Bunny” of the Democratic Party. In spite of his age, he keeps going and going. The candidate has declared and his credentials as a progressive are secure as a self described “democratic socialist.”
On the upside, when he announced, his fundraising blew up and made all of his opponents take notice. He also had a very strong finish in 2016. If it were not for suspected nefarious activities by the Clinton campaign and the DNC, there is a possibility he would have had the nomination.
On the downside, he is 77 and looks even older than that. Plus, his candidacy is no longer unique since there are many running for the nomination with views that are very similar to his.
Who? That’s what many are saying about the mayor of South Bend, Indiana. If elected, he would be the first LGBT President. He has recently started an exploratory committee.
On the upside, they say he is well received wherever he speaks and is highly relatable. If elected he would be the youngest person elected President.
On the downside, “who?” He has never held a federal office and will have a very difficult time convincing voters to take a risk on him.
The former Texas Congressman is undecided. He is described as both “odd” for his strange and contrived speaking style and “energetic” for actually being passionate when he speaks.
On the upside, he became a national celebrity among progressives and received huge amounts of support (financial and otherwise) from around the country when running for the US Senate in 2018.
On the downside, he lost that Senate race in 2018. He served six years in the House and couldn’t reach higher office. That is a difficult springboard for a race for the White House.
The Governor of Washington State has announced he is running. The relative unknown has indicated it will be, essentially, a single issue campaign. That issue is the environment.
On the upside, the environment and global warming are among the biggest priorities to the rank and file of the Democratic Party.
On the downside, the environment is one of the most polarizing issues and would likely lead to complete failure for the candidate and the Democrats in the general election.
The former Governor of Colorado is running to combat the “crisis of division” that is pervasive in the United States today.
On the upside, his message of reconciliation and national unity resonates with a significant number of voters around the country.
On the upside, most of those concerned about unity only vote in general elections, thus a candidate that focuses on such is not likely to make it to November.
The Starbucks coffee billionaire will not be running as a Democrat, if he runs at all. He declares himself independent, though in 2016 he voted for Hillary Clinton. If he runs as an independent, he threatens to disrupt the Democrats chances by potentially taking votes from the nominee. He has yet to decide.
On the upside, he is very reasonable and strives for consensus in an era of extreme divisiveness in both major parties.
On the downside, he is very reasonable and strives for consensus in an era of extreme divisiveness in both major parties. That is a formula for disaster in the demagogue world of politics today.