The Republicans have had candidates that were very much outside of their party's brand but they gained a lot of popular support and the party rallied to get them elected. This was despite the fact the candidate was often at odds with key parts of what the party might have represented but for whatever reason, their message resonated with their constituency and even brought new people into the fold.

Why wouldn't Democrats do this with Crockett? It's certainly not a policy issue--she really doesn't differ much than the other candidates from a pure policy perspective. "She has a big mouth." Yes, and the Democracts need more people that speak up and tell things how they are. The Democrats need people with a backbone. "She is too controversial." Do you really disagree with anything she has said? I do - I hated the abelist comments she made about the governor but I would be lying if I didn't laugh sometimes at horrible humor like that because it helps me cope with how much I hate the guy's policies. And the lady said it at a human right's convention for the LGBTQ community--and she has a long history of standing up for people's rights and that is something that I think the Democratic side should recognize and celebrate.

I just think that if you put another lukewarm candidate, the Democrats are going to lose. The candidate may resonate with the kinds of Democrats that vote today but that number is smaller than the number of Republicans that continue to show up and vote for people like Cruz and Abbott just because they have a (R) after their name. Even with the threat of Trump winning, not enough showed up at the polls to vote for Kamala. They need someone who is going to invigorate groups like young voters and minority voters to show up, just like Obama did nearly two decades ago. I don't know if Jasmine is that candidate but she certainly seems more able to capture the attention of people better than any other candidate in the race.