Hey, look, I'm back. Why not?
So, it's actually way too early to be talking about this stuff... we just had an election for God's sake... but I guess I can't help myself (sigh).
I would like to share what I believe are the three most important things we should be thinking about when we consider who to nominate as our Presidential nominee, in order of importance:
1) Can they win?
2) Can they win?
3) Can they win?
That is, of course, my way of saying that electability is pretty much the only thing that really matters. Why? Because the Presidency is actually a pretty limited position... they can really only do as much as Congress will let them. This was a source of great frustration during the Obama years and has been a source of some solace more recently. The two things that a President can really affect are foreign policy and judges (and other appointments). So, let's say the fourth most important thing to consider is foreign policy, because we do have some different viewpoints there. Judges are more consequential for our daily lives, but the truth is any Democrat is going to be choosing from the same bench of liberal justices. There aren't a bunch of 'socialist' judges out there waiting to be chosen.
I've said it before, but the fundamental flaw in reasoning of Sanders-supporters and their ilk is they think the reason we still had so many problems after 8 years of Obama as President is that he wasn't liberal enough. Obama did as much as he could. Demanding single-payer health care would have only ensured he didn't make the VERY SUBSTANTIAL progress on that issue that he did. The first two years of his presidency, when he had a Democratic Congress, were the most productive since LBJ. But once he lost Congress there was only so much he could do. So, if you want big change, don't focus on purity tests for Presidential candidates, focus on getting MORE DEMOCRATS in Congress.
Having said that, choosing the most electable candidate isn't necessarily so obvious. With fewer and fewer swing/independent voters, being able to rally your base is important. Preferably you don't want a lightning rod who's going to rally the other side against you either. But you do need to give Democrats something to be excited about. Obama threaded the needle perfectly in terms of exciting liberals without freaking out middle of the road types. Do we have someone who fits the bill this go round? For what its worth, here are my thoughts on some of the candidates being discussed, in no particular order...
First, I'll just come out and say: The ideal candidate should probably be a man. Women are simply not treated the same by our media, or indeed by our population as a whole. People are just way more likely to view a woman seeking power negatively. It's completely unfair. But this next election MUST be won. Let's deal with the world at it is, not as we wish it were.
Also, for the record, I will say now that whoever wins the Democratic primary will have my full, enthusiastic support, without any reservations.
Ok, onto the candidates...
Elizabeth Warren: I like her a lot. Hell, there's a part of me rooting for her, despite myself. That said, if we want to recreate the dynamics of the last election that led to the current disaster, I think she's the one you would pick! Look at how people treated her over that Native American DNA test... somehow it was some huge blunder. Essentially, no matter what she does she will be wrong and terrible somehow. Again, it's BS, but let's acknowledge the dynamic and plan accordingly.
Kamala Harris: A black (ok: mixed) woman from California. Think people might bring some pre-conceptions to how they view her? That said, when you see her speak she does defy those pre-conceptions. As a former DA she brings a certain toughness. Still, most people outside partisan Democratic circles aren't going to even give her a chance. She, like Warren, will be a formidable candidate in the primary but I suspect have a lot of trouble in a general election. Fox News would love it. They'd turn her into the devil incarnate.
Bernie Sanders: Pass.
Michael Bloomberg: The other Democrat-when-it-suits-me. I lived in NYC during his tenure and unlike most of my friends I actually thought he seemed to be doing a pretty good job. He's pragmatic. That said, I will never forget him standing on that stage at the Republican National Convention in 2004 and speaking in support of George W. Bush. I think that dooms his chances in the primary, as perhaps it should.
Biden: The only real reservation I have about Biden is his age. The guy is old. He's got a great resume, obviously, and he's a like-able dude. There are plenty of things over his long career to nitpick about (the Anita Hill hearings weren't so hot), but I think he'd make a damn strong candidate. He's just.... OLD.
Beto: Speaking of like-able dudes, I like this one a lot. He's got great, positive energy. I feel like if you don't like Beto as a person you need to take a look at yourself, haha. That said, his resume is quite thin for a presidential candidate. I think people would have fair concerns about if this guy's really prepared for the job (granted, when whoever wins the nomination goes up against DT it will seem kind of absurd to worry about that).
Sherrod Brown: I like this guy! Working class guy focused on working class people. I hope he runs!
Jay Inslee: Washington state governor, says if he runs the environment will be his top issue. The environment is my top issue, so I'm already intrigued. Apparently he enjoys a good fight and has no reluctance to give it to DT. I do think we need someone who WANTS to fight. Who enjoys the back and forth and who is without fear. Perhaps that's Inslee?
Amy Klobuchar: I already said I think we probably need a man, but Klobuchar does make me question that assumption. She's got this low-key Midwestern thing going on that maybe could allow her to avoid the awful gender dynamics in this country. I find her like-able and down-to-earth. (If you don't know her here's a clip of her on The View talking about John McCain) I imagine her presidency would be very boring, and wouldn't THAT be a relief!! I hope she runs.
Those are not the only people running, of course, but those are the ones on my radar at least. Eric Holder and Cory Booker are a couple others that might get some traction, although I don't have much to say about either at the moment.
You will notice I did not apply a bunch of liberal litmus tests in my assessments, because: It. Does. Not. Matter. We just need to get Individual 1 out of the White House (so he can stand trial), and get someone in there not actively trying to ruin the country, who will appoint some good judges.
THEN, if you want to actually change this country for the better, start thinking about what you can do to elect more Democrats to Congress. Because that's where change will really come from.
