Successor to Sanders and/or Warren

[vcczar]

This poll is based on this article: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/3675370-five-progressives-who-could-be-the-next-sanders-or-warren/

[vcczar]

I'm picking Newsom for two reasons:

• While I think AOC is more energizing, she's also so young and I don't want her leading the faction of the Democrats that I prefer for like half a century. I think she should be next in line after whomever is next. 
• I like Fetterman a lot but he seems like he has a life expectancy of hopefully at least one senate term. I think Newsom is the healthier option. 

I think Newsom will have broader range than Bush and Khanna. He's also old enough that he could be transitional as new Progressives emerge. 

[Hestia]

I'm not sure Newsom would fit into the Bernie lane as much, but he could succeed Warren more successfully. It just depends on what specific lane people are looking at. Warren and Sanders are very distinctly different types of progressives. 

Edited October 6, 2022 by Hestia

[Sean F Kennedy]

Ro Khanna definitely is the most palatable to the majority of voters.

[Pringles]

Not sure if I consider Newsom Progressive. Khanna is the most competent of the Progressives.

[DakotaHale]

“Who is the most natural successor to Sanders or Warren? Who should lead progressives in the late 2020s and 2030s?” these seem like two different questions. I voted AOC because I read the first one first (and I took it meaning who I thought was most likely). But obviously I don’t like her. I don’t hate Newsom so he’d get my vote for who “should” lead, but I don’t think he will.

[DakotaHale]

1 minute ago, DakotaHale said:

“Who is the most natural successor to Sanders or Warren? Who should lead progressives in the late 2020s and 2030s?” these seem like two different questions. I voted AOC because I read the first one first (and I took it meaning who I thought was most likely). But obviously I don’t like her. I don’t hate Newsom so he’d get my vote for who “should” lead, but I don’t think he will.

Scratch that. Just read about Ro Khanna. Didn’t know who he was until this post. He “should” lead. I’m actually very partial to progressive populists, but definitely not when they’re socialists or the like. I would even happily vote for one if they were pro-life. 

[ShortKing]

I think the Sanders camp is looking to Khanna to be the one to carry the torch moving forward of the more populist progressive faction. Warren I actually think is in a different camp that prefers a more technocratic progressivism that is looking at potential successors like Katie Porter and Ayanna Pressley. 

[ConservativeElector2]

All the people mentioned in the poll carry some baggage. AOC is too impulsive, which makes her not believeable and frustration might soon raise with her when she's in the lead. Bush and Khanna are too unknown yet. Fetterman needs to get elected first.

I wouldn't see Newsom as a progressive, but even if he is seen as one, he'll always be the CA guy. I don't believe he would be inspiring to other progressives across the country. Even if you don't like Sanders and Warren, you have to acknowledge that they are better leaders than these people, who don't seem to be natural-born leaders. Take Michelle Wu who seems to be Warren's heir and protégé. But I doubt she has what it takes to lead an ideological movement.

[Rodja]

As one of the most progressive members of this forum,i would prefer AOC of all the options.She is the one with highest national profile and largest fanbase as well as the most simmilar to Progressive God Emperor Bernie Sanders.I do have things i dislike about AOC,but i believe she will get them in order in 5-10 years and be ready to take over the Sanders/Warren mantel

In order of preference for me it would be

1.AOC

2.John Fetterman(he would have been No.1 but his health is in worse shape than either Bernie or Warren so i dont really see him as right successor)

3.Ro Khanna(Too low national profile,i dont know too much about him but i like everything i know)

4.Cori Bush(Strong,passionate,fighter.She is fantastic but i am not sure if she would have much of an appeal nationwide)

5.Gavin Newsome(NOT A PROGRESSIVE.He is just an upgraded liberal Democrat,i would vote for him in a general election but in a primary it would be a really though sell.Hes great as a compromise candidate,but would be just an unexciting watered down option as candidate representing progressives)

I also love Nina Turner but she should first win a federal office so we could talk about national progressive leader,but if we lived in a sandbox fantasy world,she would be my No.1 choice.

[MrPotatoTed]

I don't like Newsom because he's suspiciously good looking in a way that normal humans are not.

Anyone who wants to succeed Bernie has to bring that disheveled grandpa look to the table.

[Cal]

There's no one that brings the same passionate charm that Bernie does within that group, save AOC. She may be controversial, but the way they're treated in the political mainstream is very similar. Bernie is consistently vilified for having never worked "a real job" (he was a carpenter!) and AOC is ridiculed for coming from a working-class background of being "just a bartender." Both are treated as out of touch with the working class, despite coming neither from wealth of politically connected families. 

They're both fiery legislators who are compared against to paint other liberals as more moderate. 

Both are principled and do not bend to political pressure. As pointed out by @ShortKing, Warren is more of a technocratic middle-road incremental progressive and political opportunist when it can fulfill her vision goal. I absolutely see Newsom in the same vein and Fetterman and Khanna to a lesser degree. Bernie and AOC are unyielding in their beliefs. So, when it comes to who is the true "heir" to the movement, I think it's clear that AOC is the only name that is even worth a mention at this point in time (also due to the lack of name recognition for Khanna, Turner, and Bush). 

Now, for who SHOULD lead the progressives? Imo that's still AOC. She, like Bernie, unabashedly takes much of the flak and accusations of far left socialism and allows the more pragmatic progressives like Warren to appear more palatable. If Warren lead the progressive wing of the party, suddenly we'd find her brand of progressivism to be too far to the left of the American mainstream. We might as well continue to pull the Overton Window leftward, even if it's skewed far to the right on an international scale. 

[vcczar]

I think one of the issues here is that the article puts Sanders and Warren in the same camp, when they're really allies of their own camp. AOC is more of a successor to Sanders, while Newsom is more of a successor to Warren. The others kind of seem in between the two. 

[jnewt]

On 10/5/2022 at 10:21 PM, DakotaHale said:

“Who is the most natural successor to Sanders or Warren? Who should lead progressives in the late 2020s and 2030s?” these seem like two different questions. I voted AOC because I read the first one first (and I took it meaning who I thought was most likely). 

Fully agree. AOC is the “most natural” successor, but Ro Khanna should be the successor. 

[Zenobiyl]

Voted for Fetterman. It’s really him or AOC, and between them I see Fetterman as the next stage of Bernie’s movement.

1. If he wins, he will have shown that the ideas of Bernie Sanders can win statewide elections in swing states. That’s something even AOC could never prove, and it is key to Bernie’s movement (winning right wing states was key to his 2016 primary strategy, and he tried to appeal to the WWC with economic populism too).

2. Fetterman shares Bernie’s idiosyncratic and sometimes maverick tendencies. Both differ from the national party on a few issues. Both also have unusual bases of support (the youth vote supported Bernie? / Trump voters are backing Fetterman?) and vibes (an old yet energetic guy with new ideas, and a leftist who looks and dresses like a trump-voting steel worker)

3. Ultimately, AOC and the other Squad members will all be fighting to keep their lane in the house (and most would struggle to make the case for electability in a primary), but as a senator Fetterman will have a much clearer space to profess his ideas and be the mouthpiece of progressivism. 

[Fbarbarossa]

Voted Newsom. Ro Khanna is the heir to Newsom in my opinion. Khanna is great but he's a congressman right now, and congressmen never get that far. Newsom inherits the progessive banner and runs with it until Khanna acquires a statewide office, then Khanna is the golden boy