Democrats (Even Liberals) Prefer Clinton Over Warren

The chart above was made from information contained in a recent YouGov Poll that was done between July 22nd and 25th of a random national sample of 1,000 adults, and has a margin of error of about 4 points.

Recently we have seen many progressives (those who are liberal) urging Elizabeth Warren to challenge Hillary Clinton for the 2016 presidential nomination. This was evident at the recent gathering of bloggers at Netroots Nation, has been fairly common on social media internet sites, and has even been reported in the mainstream media. It has given the illusion that those of us on the left prefer Elizabeth Warren to Hillary Clinton.

But while that is true of some, it is not true of a majority of those who are likely to vote in the Democratic primary -- not even a majority of those on the left. Note in the chart above that every single group likely to vote in the Democratic primary prefers Clinton to Warren -- and that includes those of us who say they are "very liberal" (Warren's natural constituency). Here are the Clinton over Warren gaps of the various groups:

All Adults -- 14 points
All Democrats -- 40 points
Very Liberal -- 13 points
Liberal -- 25 points
Moderate -- 21 points
Political Volunteer -- 17 points

Those are some pretty big gaps -- well above the margin of error (even the slightly higher margin of error of the individual groups). Senator Warren has said she will not run -- and her wishes should be honored by all progressives.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am one of those "very liberal" people who will vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016 -- even if Warren was to run. Don't get me wrong though. I love Elizabeth Warren. I consider her to be one of the two best senators in Washington (the other being Bernie Sanders), and I think she has even been a better senator than Hillary Clinton was.

But Hillary Clinton could win the general election in 2016, and I'm not at all sure Elizabeth Warren could do that. I do hope we can someday have a President Warren, but 2016 is not the right time -- since she is just not yet well-known enough or well-liked enough among the general population (the Independents who will swing the election one way or the other).

It is highly likely that the Republicans will nominate a right-wing extremist in 2016 (Cruz, Huckabee, Paul, Ryan, etc.), and I think that candidate sitting in the White House would seriously damage both our democracy and our economy. We simply cannot afford to take that chance by nominating any candidate who would put the outcome of the 2016 election in doubt. And anyone who thinks Warren would have as easy a path to the presidency as Clinton are living in a dream world.

All Democrats, even those of us on the left, need to get behind the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. Once she gets in the White House, we can pressure her to move a little farther to the left. But even if she doesn't, with a Democratic Congress, she will improve the economy and make it fairer, raise the minimum wage, reduce the wealth & income gap by taxing the rich and seeing corporations pay taxes, remove the tax subsidy for corporate exporting of American jobs, and create many new jobs by rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure.

Once that is done, the people will improve their view of the Democratic Party -- and that will improve the chances of other Democrats (like Warren) to be elected in the future.

That's my opinion. What's yours?