The list has been updated to include some less known hopefuls like Richard Ojeda and Tom Delaney, and to add the category of “Possible hopefuls,” which is admittedly like saying “tentative provisionals” or other such redundant phrases, but you know what I mean.
That category is just kind of like… whatever, man. So if you really feel like someone might possibly decide to run for president and are desperate to seem them up on the main scoreboard, just tag me and I’ll add them.
Warren/Sanders ticket please please please. Running on a simple platform of taxing billionaires to fund single payer or the Green New Deal should pull an easy win vs 45.
There have to be millions of Republicans who, after witnessing the next level batshit craziness of Donald Trump, himself a gibbering Grecian abomination who can somehow never fly too close to the sun, are thinking to themselves, “Maybe the Democrats actually can succeed in taxing the crap outta these rich assholes and make life better for the regular everyday working people of America. Maybe I owe it to myself and my family to give it a shot.”
I’m really skeptical of this as a platform on which to win elections. I don’t think the language works, because FDR’s New Deal was rhetorically a lot more significant for a country in an economic depression. It resonated well with the public at large. “Green New Deal” is calling back to something most Americans only have a historical memory of, and which is increasingly politicized by revisionism*. “Green” by itself also has baggage and carries a lot of skepticism. Hell, I’m skeptical when I hear it, because “green” tends to mean what certain groups think is environmentally friendly, rather than having some very difficult conversations about risk, reward, and externalities.
In a lot of ways, I don’t have issues with the substance of the proposal, (though there are elements that are problematic in their top-down approach to scientific research, a la “Manhattan Project to cure cancer.”) I think that in talking to people who don’t agree with me politically though, the packaging isn’t good. I don’t think it’s inspiring anyone who isn’t already pretty firmly on the left. You can say that people have been lied to about this, or conditioned to think that, but at the end of the day, how they got there doesn’t matter, you have to sell to people as you find them. I’m not saying it’s impossible to build enthusiasm for the deal as is, I just think this is a really difficult task.
*The politically motivated kind, not the scholarly kind.
Notably, although our description of the Deal accurately provided details about the proposal, it did not mention that the Green New Deal is championed by Democratic members of Congress such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and John Lewis (D-GA). Other research has shown that people evaluate policies more negatively when they are told it is backed by politicians from an opposing political party. Conversely, people evaluate the same policy more positively when told it is backed by politicians from their own party.
How the question was asked matters, and a lot of people have yet to hear about it.
If you can connect global climate change with the wildfires and hurricanes, you might get somewhere with that language though. Especially if you can make the argument that things are going to get worse due to our lack of action.
It bears repeating that just because a policy is popular, it doesn’t mean that it will pass a government organized around the principal of Federalism. This incongruity is only increasing as the difference between state populations grows. Low-population, high carbon-extraction states like West Virginia and Wyoming punch far above their weights, especially when combined with procedural tools like cloture favored in the Senate.