What?
Obama was the obvious choice from the 2004 keynote convention speech.
Bill Clinton was a Governor and razor focused from teen years
And you are also talking about James Carter?
Yeah Gerald Ford just wanted out.

He was shot at twice and was not good at stairs.

Yes, less art and more matter, as Shakespeare might say. Another rousing waffling orator like Clinton or Obama would be a huge mistake. That's why Sanders cut through, despite his grumpy and grizzled appearance. He said exactly what he would do, and who would take the hit, and people knew it. They didn't want style or charisma, they wanted action, policies and goals. They still do. If the Dems pose another speech maker with no substance, they'll deserve to lose.

@BufftonBeotch Of course a black man was the obvious choice in these United States! HAHAHA! Neither Carter, Clinton, or Obama were power brokers or even close to being favorites in the beginning of their races. Being a Governor like Carter and Clinton does not make one well known. They came out of nowhere. How many Governors can you name right now?

@David1955 To say that Obama and Clinton did not have substance is not an accurate statement.The only two Presidents in my lifetime who had little or no substance were Bush Jr. and Trump.

@Sticks48 not substance as progressive politicians they didn't. Personally, I think Clinton sold out to the right after the mid terms in 1994 on all policies. Obama is a good and decent man, but rousing speeches aside, there's little of his Presidency that didn't ultimately serve the interests of Capital, and people knew it.

@David1955
McConnell was determined, and stated such. He would stop Obama from doing anything. Boehner would have worked with Obama, but the Freedom Caucus would let him do nothing. That is the history of the thing. If you don't know by now, if you go to far left or right, the American people get scared. Most Americans are centrists leaning left on some issues and right on others. I am a liberal, so I say this with no joy. Maybe it will be different in 2020. I hope so.

@Sticks48 amen to that!

Is it at all surprising that a free market, capitalist society would figure out a way to monetize its public, political system?

@Haemish1 no, not surprising. I'm enough of a Marxist to know that the political structure, and all with it, reflects the underlining economic system, with it class and power structure.

@David1955
I’m not to knowledgeable about Marx, but didn’t he essentially boil everything down to class struggle?

@Haemish1 he saw class struggle as the inevitable result of contradictions in the socio economic system, but I was referring to his analysis that politics and culture and the rest are part of the superstructure that reflects the underlying economic system. Essentially and crudely put, economics drives the dynamic of social and political and other change. Not the other way round.