February 20, 2019
The Democratic Primary field is off to a running start. What are the chances of those who have announced to take on President Donald Trump that can actually win?
______________________________
So far the Democrats' nomination campaign for Armageddon (2020) has started, and it has not been boring. A large number of Democrats or those who lean Democratic have thrown their hat into the three-ring circus that is a Presidential Primary. The first few who have announced formally include California Senator Kamala Harris, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, former Starbucks CEO Howard Shultz, Obama HUD Secretary Julian Castro, Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, New York Senator Kristin Gillibrand, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, former Maryland Congressman John Delaney, Pete Buttigieg, South Bend Indiana's current mayor, and Oprah's former advisor Marianne Williamson. That is a big group, but it stands to get much bigger, especially if former New York Mayor and founder of Bloomberg News Michael Bloomberg and current mayor Bill de Blasio enter the race. As of February 19th, Senator Bernie Sanders has made a formal announcement that he will run again, and he is going to get a lot of press like he did last time in 2016. One of the new requirements the Democratic party initiated after 2016 was that anyone who runs as a Democrat must be a registered Democrat in order to enter their primaries. This could be known as the "Bernie Rule." Former Senator and Vice President Joe Biden has not declared as of yet, but if he does, he, along with Senators Sanders and Harris will be three of the most followed candidates. Polling shows that those three garner the most interest, but time will tell if anyone breaks away from the pack.
Most are very liberal, but Mr. Bloomberg ran New York City as a Republican. He has enormous wealth from which to gain media support and an ability to create an effective network of offices in every state. Once the official DNC debates kick off in the middle of the year, more candidates will make it hard for a particular candidate to stand out and get increased public support. I think many Democrats will want Mr. Bloomberg to challenge President Trump, simply because of his large personal wealth to find information on Mr. Trump that the media has not been able to discover to use against him. In addition, Mayor Bloomberg has the confidence to throw whatever insults President Trump hurls at him with equal gusto. If he declares his intent, he must leave the gate running and have the essential elements in place to ward off any serious challengers.
Of the Senate Democrats who have announced so far, Senators Harris and Gillibrand have the most visibility, due in part to being senators from two high profile states with large and prominent media markets. As such, the DNC would prefer that one of them locks up the nomination early, thereby avoiding the problems Hillary Clinton had in dispatching Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders in 2016, who despite his underdog status won 20 primaries and close to 16 million votes.
Although the DNC is not making it obvious, I personally believe that the Democrats would like Senator Harris, with her biracial background, from the donor and electoral vote-rich state of California, to win the Democratic nomination running away before any serious challenger can gain any momentum. She spent time as the District Attorney for the city of San Francisco, California's Attorney General and is currently the junior senator from California. There was a recent online column by former Assembly Speaker and Mayor of San Francisco Willie Brown, who detailed being her mentor and having dated her in the '90s while Ms. Harris was given prominent and well-paying city commissions to propel her political career. Some might say talking about this time in her life is sexist, but if you were given a leg up in your career by someone who you had dated, it is fair game to talk about it, but it should not diminish any of her accomplishments and rise through the ranks in the state. Senator Harris has declared her support for Medicare for All, something progressives are clamoring for, along with her interest in Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal initiative. These are obvious plays for Democratic primary support, but other candidates have stated their endorsements of these ideas too. Ms. Harris must show detailed policy proposals that will help gain interest in her candidacy. Character and ethics are part of the audition for becoming President of the United States, so Ms. Harris should not shy away from stating her case and include things that the public might have questions about, including her personal life. If she can handle it well the voters will be impressed, and her front-runner status will be cemented.
Senator Gillibrand is also from a valuable voter-rich state, one with media, finance and a large film and television industries from which to draw large contributions. She could make life difficult for Senator Harris. Ms. Gillibrand is a well known and prominent feminist and she will gather a lot of votes from Hillary voters in New York, who would like to see New York make history sending the first woman to the White House. However, I don't see Senator Gillibrand with the needed gravitas to fight off serious challengers. Even though she is an accomplished lawyer, and has spent a good amount of time in the House and Senate, I don't see her overcoming the financial and popular support Senator Harris will bring with her during the primary fight that will sure to come. Not to mention she was a lawyer representing Phillip Morris during the Clinton Administration's legal fight against the tobacco companies, and her law firm's infamous client, Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein. Her voting record in the House was markedly different from her liberal record in the Senate. Debates can be where campaigns are won and lost, and where momentum is generated the most, but I don't see Senator Gillibrand being able to win those with the baggage of her prior House votes and her legal career prior to politics.
Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota will come into the race from the coveted geographical region of the Midwest, an area that the Democrats need in order to win back the White House. Hillary Clinton lost parts of that region, winning only Illinois and Minnesota, but losing Ohio and Michigan. Even though she has a warm, on-air personality, there have been recent stories in the Huffington Post, Vanity Fair and a few other publications who detail her difficult and unduly demanding treatment of her staff. Additionally, I do not know or recall any prominent piece of legislation she shepherded through the Congress that passed and was of some benefit to the American people. Despite this, the country is at a time when having no serious accomplishments in the Senate (or elected public service for that matter) has any bearing on whether a person can be taken seriously as a future occupant of the White House. So, Senator Klobuchar can gain traction, but she needs to win debates as well, with memorable quotes and viral zingers that will propel her to a position of contention.
While Senators Harris, Gillibrand and Klobuchar have potential, I believe Senator Elizabeth Warren's campaign is dead without even contesting a primary. Her bungled attempt to show her native American ancestry turned out to be a farcical amount found in her DNA. Donald Trump had a field day when she initially brought into the open her allegedly American Indian roots, calling her "Pocahontas." Additionally, her informal announcement while attempting to be a "regular" person having a beer on a live webcam looked phony and lacked any sort of spontaneity that voters love and social media salivates for. Her speaking delivery won't win over any new voters, but she is another accomplished woman, who has taught at Harvard Law School and has been a strong advocate for financial protections for the American consumer. Her support for and advising the Obama Administration on the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) was important. That should be her angle and the direction her campaign should take, but her clumsy handling over parts of her life story could damage her with a Democratic electorate that desperately wants confidence in a candidate who can defeat President Trump.
Among the remaining candidates, former CEO Howard Shultz is thinking about running as an independent candidate, a thought so troubling to Democrats that they are angry he could tilt the 2020 outcome towards Donald Trump. They are also nervous because of his double-digit showing in the polls in name recognition, something that other Democratic candidates do not have. Like President Trump and Mayor Bloomberg, Mr. Shultz is incredibly wealthy and can self-fund his campaign. That is something that could be intriguing for primary voters who look to a candidate that can challenge the financial power of the Republican National Committee. The remaining candidates mentioned do not have any serious chance to get nominated by the Democratic party, and I assume are doing this for increased visibility for future speaking engagements or as a contributor for one of the main cable news channels. Most are unknown and will have a tough time raising the requisite money for the media and political class to be impressed. Money is what gives the allure of a serious challenger to President Trump. Having a strong fundraising operation is key to winning key endorsements and support from influential donors and elected officials throughout the country.
So far, who is the front runner in my opinion? Senator Sanders has raised a lot of money ($5.9 million in 24 hours) since he officially declared, and he has a large following, but the mood of the Democratic base has changed. It is more left-wing intensive, and less capitalist. Most Democratic voters want someone who they know can beat President Trump, and while he did well in 2016, will that support follow him to the nomination in 2020? The party tends to like policies that are socialist in nature, but will that translate well with the general electorate?
Mr. Biden has some sympathetic support due to his deceased son's wish that he challenge the Clinton Machine in 2016. Does he have what it takes to win the nomination, especially since he has run twice before, and did not fare well as a candidate? Right now, polling shows he has support, but in the age of #Metoo, with his treatment of Anita Hill during the Senate confirmation of Judge Clarence Thomas in 1989, and with the powerful testimony Ms. Hill gave, will female voters in the Democratic party favor him now? I don't see his candidacy gaining traction, and I feel that his window to win the White House has passed. Plus, his age goes against the activist wing of the Democratic party, who tend to passionately like newcomers to the party like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, although that might not hurt Senator Sanders. Younger voters can feel his genuine passion for what he believes.
Based on the value of her state's electoral votes (54), her fundraising prowess, high media visibility, prominence in the Senate, intersectionality (levels of perceived oppression, a Democratic party metric), in this case, her biracial female ethnicity, Senator Kamala Harris should be the one to beat in 2020. However, as political consultant Paul Begala said on Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO), the true nominee of the party will distinguish himself or herself during the primary process. Based on what she brings to the table, in terms of what the Democratic party is looking for, I think Senator Harris will win the nomination. While I don't doubt that others who have declared their intentions to run (so far) have their own positives, I don't see anyone proving a better chance to challenge President Trump than
2020 is going to be a fun year. Hold On, Everybody!
Although the DNC is not making it obvious, I personally believe that the Democrats would like Senator Harris, with her biracial background, from the donor and electoral vote-rich state of California, to win the Democratic nomination running away before any serious challenger can gain any momentum. She spent time as the District Attorney for the city of San Francisco, California's Attorney General and is currently the junior senator from California. There was a recent online column by former Assembly Speaker and Mayor of San Francisco Willie Brown, who detailed being her mentor and having dated her in the '90s while Ms. Harris was given prominent and well-paying city commissions to propel her political career. Some might say talking about this time in her life is sexist, but if you were given a leg up in your career by someone who you had dated, it is fair game to talk about it, but it should not diminish any of her accomplishments and rise through the ranks in the state. Senator Harris has declared her support for Medicare for All, something progressives are clamoring for, along with her interest in Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal initiative. These are obvious plays for Democratic primary support, but other candidates have stated their endorsements of these ideas too. Ms. Harris must show detailed policy proposals that will help gain interest in her candidacy. Character and ethics are part of the audition for becoming President of the United States, so Ms. Harris should not shy away from stating her case and include things that the public might have questions about, including her personal life. If she can handle it well the voters will be impressed, and her front-runner status will be cemented.
Senator Gillibrand is also from a valuable voter-rich state, one with media, finance and a large film and television industries from which to draw large contributions. She could make life difficult for Senator Harris. Ms. Gillibrand is a well known and prominent feminist and she will gather a lot of votes from Hillary voters in New York, who would like to see New York make history sending the first woman to the White House. However, I don't see Senator Gillibrand with the needed gravitas to fight off serious challengers. Even though she is an accomplished lawyer, and has spent a good amount of time in the House and Senate, I don't see her overcoming the financial and popular support Senator Harris will bring with her during the primary fight that will sure to come. Not to mention she was a lawyer representing Phillip Morris during the Clinton Administration's legal fight against the tobacco companies, and her law firm's infamous client, Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein. Her voting record in the House was markedly different from her liberal record in the Senate. Debates can be where campaigns are won and lost, and where momentum is generated the most, but I don't see Senator Gillibrand being able to win those with the baggage of her prior House votes and her legal career prior to politics.
Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota will come into the race from the coveted geographical region of the Midwest, an area that the Democrats need in order to win back the White House. Hillary Clinton lost parts of that region, winning only Illinois and Minnesota, but losing Ohio and Michigan. Even though she has a warm, on-air personality, there have been recent stories in the Huffington Post, Vanity Fair and a few other publications who detail her difficult and unduly demanding treatment of her staff. Additionally, I do not know or recall any prominent piece of legislation she shepherded through the Congress that passed and was of some benefit to the American people. Despite this, the country is at a time when having no serious accomplishments in the Senate (or elected public service for that matter) has any bearing on whether a person can be taken seriously as a future occupant of the White House. So, Senator Klobuchar can gain traction, but she needs to win debates as well, with memorable quotes and viral zingers that will propel her to a position of contention.
While Senators Harris, Gillibrand and Klobuchar have potential, I believe Senator Elizabeth Warren's campaign is dead without even contesting a primary. Her bungled attempt to show her native American ancestry turned out to be a farcical amount found in her DNA. Donald Trump had a field day when she initially brought into the open her allegedly American Indian roots, calling her "Pocahontas." Additionally, her informal announcement while attempting to be a "regular" person having a beer on a live webcam looked phony and lacked any sort of spontaneity that voters love and social media salivates for. Her speaking delivery won't win over any new voters, but she is another accomplished woman, who has taught at Harvard Law School and has been a strong advocate for financial protections for the American consumer. Her support for and advising the Obama Administration on the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) was important. That should be her angle and the direction her campaign should take, but her clumsy handling over parts of her life story could damage her with a Democratic electorate that desperately wants confidence in a candidate who can defeat President Trump.
Among the remaining candidates, former CEO Howard Shultz is thinking about running as an independent candidate, a thought so troubling to Democrats that they are angry he could tilt the 2020 outcome towards Donald Trump. They are also nervous because of his double-digit showing in the polls in name recognition, something that other Democratic candidates do not have. Like President Trump and Mayor Bloomberg, Mr. Shultz is incredibly wealthy and can self-fund his campaign. That is something that could be intriguing for primary voters who look to a candidate that can challenge the financial power of the Republican National Committee. The remaining candidates mentioned do not have any serious chance to get nominated by the Democratic party, and I assume are doing this for increased visibility for future speaking engagements or as a contributor for one of the main cable news channels. Most are unknown and will have a tough time raising the requisite money for the media and political class to be impressed. Money is what gives the allure of a serious challenger to President Trump. Having a strong fundraising operation is key to winning key endorsements and support from influential donors and elected officials throughout the country.
So far, who is the front runner in my opinion? Senator Sanders has raised a lot of money ($5.9 million in 24 hours) since he officially declared, and he has a large following, but the mood of the Democratic base has changed. It is more left-wing intensive, and less capitalist. Most Democratic voters want someone who they know can beat President Trump, and while he did well in 2016, will that support follow him to the nomination in 2020? The party tends to like policies that are socialist in nature, but will that translate well with the general electorate?
Mr. Biden has some sympathetic support due to his deceased son's wish that he challenge the Clinton Machine in 2016. Does he have what it takes to win the nomination, especially since he has run twice before, and did not fare well as a candidate? Right now, polling shows he has support, but in the age of #Metoo, with his treatment of Anita Hill during the Senate confirmation of Judge Clarence Thomas in 1989, and with the powerful testimony Ms. Hill gave, will female voters in the Democratic party favor him now? I don't see his candidacy gaining traction, and I feel that his window to win the White House has passed. Plus, his age goes against the activist wing of the Democratic party, who tend to passionately like newcomers to the party like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, although that might not hurt Senator Sanders. Younger voters can feel his genuine passion for what he believes.
Based on the value of her state's electoral votes (54), her fundraising prowess, high media visibility, prominence in the Senate, intersectionality (levels of perceived oppression, a Democratic party metric), in this case, her biracial female ethnicity, Senator Kamala Harris should be the one to beat in 2020. However, as political consultant Paul Begala said on Real Time with Bill Maher (HBO), the true nominee of the party will distinguish himself or herself during the primary process. Based on what she brings to the table, in terms of what the Democratic party is looking for, I think Senator Harris will win the nomination. While I don't doubt that others who have declared their intentions to run (so far) have their own positives, I don't see anyone proving a better chance to challenge President Trump than
2020 is going to be a fun year. Hold On, Everybody!
