The Democrats' 2020 Nominee
At the time of this writing, there are well over twenty Democrats who have formally declared their intentions to seek the office of the President of the United States in the year 2020. The list includes just about every size, shape, gender and color of human being in the catalog, but thus far, nobody seems to know who will emerge as the front runner. At this point, I assume the higher-ups are panicked just trying to figure out how to cram everyone on to the same debate stage at one time.
The problem with Presidential prognostication is that too many pundits are basing their predictions on unreliable or just plain weird data. Some use the same tactics they applied in high school to determine whose popularity would win the prom queen crown. Others utilize the "packaging" approach, trying to stuff as many facets into one conglomerated individual in order to pander to the maximum number of voters. Still more prefer the cynical strategy, in which "nothing ever changes" or "the Deep State political machine will choose its candidate the same way it always has."
As usual, I opt for another method entirely.
I submit that to really get a handle on 2020, forget what color the people are and start focusing on what color the states are. That's where the first big clue really is. One glance at this map shows exactly which states the Democrats lost in 2016, but thought they were going to win. The so-called "purple states" -- which could swing either way -- is where the big battles are. The Dems want to do everything they can to swing those states' Electoral votes to blue in 2020, so it stands to reason that a nominee from one of those states has an inside track.
If you buy into that argument, the Democrat nominee is currently eating his lunch in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Wisconsin, North Carolina or Virginia. Yes, there are more purple states, but with ten or fewer Electoral votes, they're minor players.
Notice I mentioned the nominee eating his lunch? That's because even notable Democrats are spooked by the party's public shift to the far left and fear losing even more center-aligned Democrats to either an independent or President Trump. So the second Democrat imperative is to recruit a middle-aged white man: First, in order to reassure the rank and file, the Democrats need optics that confirm the party hasn't gone over the edge. Second, without conceding his successes, the Democrats want to wheel out their version of a kinder, gentler Donald Trump.
In case you were sleeping, this is why Howard Schultz is rattling the bars on his cage.
What about diversity, you ask? Simple. That's what Vice Presidents are for. Roll up a non-white, female of questionable gender as your veep, limit her to one public debate and you're good to go.
Next, start eliminating the mathematical factors. No member of the House of Representatives has made the leap to the Presidency in over a century. No reason to think it would happen now, so scratch those names off your list. You can also cross out any mayors or state politicians, because they're perceived as way too local and/or green.
That pretty much leaves the short list United States Senators and Governors. As you can see, only Pennsylvania, Virginia and North Carolina have blue governors -- and they're all white men.
Ooooo, the plot thickens!
Look at those states' United States senators, and they're all white men, too. Knock out the losers (Tim Kaine is too closely identified with Hillary and Ralph Northam is stained with black face) and the list gets pretty short -- if you're buying into any of this.
Okay, so maybe this isn't how it's going to play out. But you have to admit one thing: It makes more sense than anything else you're seeing from the Democrats these days.
The problem with Presidential prognostication is that too many pundits are basing their predictions on unreliable or just plain weird data. Some use the same tactics they applied in high school to determine whose popularity would win the prom queen crown. Others utilize the "packaging" approach, trying to stuff as many facets into one conglomerated individual in order to pander to the maximum number of voters. Still more prefer the cynical strategy, in which "nothing ever changes" or "the Deep State political machine will choose its candidate the same way it always has."
As usual, I opt for another method entirely.
I submit that to really get a handle on 2020, forget what color the people are and start focusing on what color the states are. That's where the first big clue really is. One glance at this map shows exactly which states the Democrats lost in 2016, but thought they were going to win. The so-called "purple states" -- which could swing either way -- is where the big battles are. The Dems want to do everything they can to swing those states' Electoral votes to blue in 2020, so it stands to reason that a nominee from one of those states has an inside track.
If you buy into that argument, the Democrat nominee is currently eating his lunch in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Wisconsin, North Carolina or Virginia. Yes, there are more purple states, but with ten or fewer Electoral votes, they're minor players.
Notice I mentioned the nominee eating his lunch? That's because even notable Democrats are spooked by the party's public shift to the far left and fear losing even more center-aligned Democrats to either an independent or President Trump. So the second Democrat imperative is to recruit a middle-aged white man: First, in order to reassure the rank and file, the Democrats need optics that confirm the party hasn't gone over the edge. Second, without conceding his successes, the Democrats want to wheel out their version of a kinder, gentler Donald Trump.
In case you were sleeping, this is why Howard Schultz is rattling the bars on his cage.
What about diversity, you ask? Simple. That's what Vice Presidents are for. Roll up a non-white, female of questionable gender as your veep, limit her to one public debate and you're good to go.
Next, start eliminating the mathematical factors. No member of the House of Representatives has made the leap to the Presidency in over a century. No reason to think it would happen now, so scratch those names off your list. You can also cross out any mayors or state politicians, because they're perceived as way too local and/or green.
That pretty much leaves the short list United States Senators and Governors. As you can see, only Pennsylvania, Virginia and North Carolina have blue governors -- and they're all white men.
Ooooo, the plot thickens!
Look at those states' United States senators, and they're all white men, too. Knock out the losers (Tim Kaine is too closely identified with Hillary and Ralph Northam is stained with black face) and the list gets pretty short -- if you're buying into any of this.
Okay, so maybe this isn't how it's going to play out. But you have to admit one thing: It makes more sense than anything else you're seeing from the Democrats these days.
posted by Rob Frankel at 11:08 AM
1 Comments:
Bob Casey of Pennsylvania would be the prototypical politician of which you speak of. Thrice elected US senator from a “Purple” state (“more Blue on each end and Alabama in the middle”-James Carville.) His politics are definitely centrist and he has had enormous success in turning out Democratic voters, especially after highly charged primary challenges from the left. Son of a Governor, from Scranton, Catholic, excellent educational and political C.V., stable marriage w/ 4 daughters.
OR
Mark Warner of Virginia would also “fit the bill.” Twice elected US Senator from a more mixed geo-political state. His reputation is of a consensus builder and moderate to the extreme. Another A+ C.V. Soaked up policy chops working for Abe Ribicoff to pay his way through GW (top honors!)and went straight to work for Chris Dodd out of Harvard Law. Left politics to make his fortune in the TelCom industry. He is a known, respected and moderating force in both the DNC and US senate. Oh, and has the required set piece of a loving marriage & 3 daughters.
Post a Comment
<< Home