Who else do they have?
Serious question.
“Who else do they have?
Serious question.”
When you look at the ages of Republicans vs. Democrats I think that by-and-large the Democrats are older on average. They seek power right out of school and keep it until they die. They do this at the expense of developing a younger base that will be the future of the party. (Then, again, a Democrat is about personal power, not the party. The party is just the means to an end.)
Here is the story I know directly. A young woman lawyer (who had never had a job and who was born with a silver spoon in her mouth) ran against Representative Bill Young and got 40% of the vote. When Young died in office a few months later she announced she would run again for his office in the special election. At first the Democratic party backed her. Then she got a call from the party and was told that the party had decided to back Alex Sink, who had just been defeated in the Governor’s race by Rick Scott. Sink, as I recall, was in her seventies and did not live in Young’s district. But they ran her anyway. This was not a must-win and was an opportunity to inexpensively introduce young blood into the Democrats in the House. (A House race costs on average three million dollars. A special election would be about half that.) Sink lost.
As much as I don’t care for people in office who have never held a real job, the Democrats lost an opportunity to have a young, pretty, personable woman with potential in a position to run for higher office later.
So, in answer to your question, anybody by Hillary. There are Democrats who are younger, more personable and faster on their feet. But they lack the connections in the party to have the vote super-delegated to them. Also, the Democrats have fractured into the left, the further left and the just-left-of-Pluto left. It is hard to find a candidate who fits all those categories as they are somewhat mutually exclusive.