It's a circular dilemma that I'm struggling with. Once you say, with justification, "there's no way they'll nominate a senile crook like Joe" you look around the room at the other possibilities, and they're possibly worse.
Every single one of them is unelectable in their own way, but somebody's gotta get the nomination.
And it won't be Hillary, the only human being in history to have actually lost an election to Trump. Nobody not named Clinton wants to see her run again.
This is why I think, in a brokered convention, Manchin is the RATS best bet.
He ain't a screamin' loon.
He speaks in measured tones.
He is NOT gaffe prone.
He has shown an ability to "reach across the aisle" (I loathe that term)
He is considered by many to be a "conservative" RAT.
Now don't get me wrong, I want President Trump to get a second term and believe he will, but I think if the RATS can rub two brain cells together, he would be their only choice.
I can't help comparing the choice of GOP candidates 3 years ago. Trump was competing against a vibrant, virile crowd -- Rubio, Cruz, Carson.
Back then, it was . . . Hillary & Bernie? That was all they could come up with? It indicated the direction the Democrats were heading. The current choice of Democratic candidates have only proven how it's gotten worse.