A brief review of the Democrat Presidential hopefuls.

No doubt, there are more names that can be listed as "Democrat hopefuls,"  but these are the names that are most mentioned,  at this time.

Hillary Clinton:  there is a growing feeling that her candidacy is not a foregone conclusion.  She is older,  with less political clout than before she worked in the Obama Administration doing his bidding in the Benhgazi cover-up and the criminal negligence surrounding that pathetic episode.  She accomplished nothing of import as to the peace process between Palestine and Israel.  She has stood silently by as Obama works to aid Iran in its nuclear aspirations and is without note,  as the Secretary of State,  except that she visited more than 100 countries   . . . . . .   BFD (with "F" being short for "freaking" ).  She not only supported ObamaCare,  but authored a failed attempt at "universal healthcare,"  in 1992-93.  Finally,  she did nothing "outstanding" during the recent midterm disaster for her party,  confirming the notion that she is no stronger an influence within the D party than is Biden or Bernie Sanders.

Maryland Governor,  Martin O'Malley,  is fairly unkown on the national stage.  An attractive candidate,  he has a failed record as to the much needed Maryland recovery:  he raised taxes 24 times,  taking more than 2 billion dollars from the Maryland economy;  he increased the state's debt from 25 billion when he took office four years ago,  to 35 billion,  today;  his state has lost 6,600 jobs over the recent years,  and the debt to GDP ratio is one of the worst in the region.  But no one has ever made "successful administration" a requirement for a Democrat candidate,  so he has a shot at winning the Democrat nomination.  (source:  http://www.changemaryland.org/2012/09/martin-omalley-fact-check-top-10-false-assertions/#.VGgOpDTF_wA  )

Bernie Sanders:  he caucuses with the Dems and is the only socialist within that party who will actually admit to being a socialist.  As far as his qualifications are concerned,  he has served as a Representative and Senator,  since 1988,  and has zero real world experience.  In other words,  he is grossly under-qualified, but,  paradoxically,  more qualified to serve as President than H Obama.  At any rate,  he has absolutely no chance of winning a national election.  Case closed.

Elizabeth Warren:  she is the most popular candidate from the Progressive/Utopian Left, a "darling" in the eyes of the liberal media,  and a preferred candidate by the likes of Harry Reid and other political impostors.  She is or was a Harvard professor,  a political theorist with no private sector experience.  All she knows of the private sector is what she has read in Marxist oriented materials,  and published Utopian,  One World propaganda.  She will be heavily courted by the Left,  as an alternative to Hillary,  who is seen as more moderate,  more the hawk,  more the populace candidate.  She could end Hillary's hopes,  if she decides to run for the high office.

Joe Biden:  As a presidential candidate,  he has less than a snowball's chance in hell,  and the entire nation knows it.  In 2008,  Hillary and H Obama split 36 million primary votes while Biden garnered 68,000 total votes for his candidacy.  There you have it. and he is no more popular,  as a presidential candidate,  than he was back in 2008.

He graduated at the bottom of his class in college,  and "ditto" in law school (76th out of 83 students).  He is giant nothing-burger and has been,  for decades.  A man with a great personality,  a grand smile,  a man who loves his family and wife,  but a man who has not qualified himself for the opportunities of the moment.

Conclusion:  And there you have it,  the presidential class as of today,  for the Democrat Party;  two radical socialists,  one Governor,  and a failed Vice President.   There will be others,  of course,  but,  clearly,  this Leftist Party is in a world of hurt.

2016 looks good for the GOP   . . . . .  not a prediction,  just a here and now observation.  Could change tomorrow.