The 2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination Campaign

Unfortunately, I fear that Biden jumping into the race will scare the progressive left into coalescing around Sanders, and I fear the nomination will end up between Biden and Sanders.Me, I still prefer Warren.

Paul Krugman's take.

I just donated a small amount of money to her campaign. First time I've ever donated money to a candidate's campaign.

In regards to both Biden and Sanders, I'm mostly worried about women and minorities having to put up with yet another old white man telling them what's good for them.Neither candidate strikes me as someone who'd listen as someone tries to tell them what they don't want to hear.

From this morning's New York Times: The 2020 Race Is Testing Progressives’ Power. They’re Pushing Back.The article describes the excitement of the progressive wing of the Democratic party as they have won important elections and have swung the conversation to the left and their frustration that Biden's campaign threatens to yank it back to the "Center".Some thoughts I have about the Democratic nomination:

• Biden's support is "only" 30%-40%. This is a plurality right now, but remember the rest of the support is divided among many other candidates on the left. As non-viable candidates drop out, their support will undoubtably go to other left candidates. It's not clear yet whether Biden is alread near his ceiling.
  ​
• This is especially true when you consider that at this point very few people are paying more than a superficial attention to the election right now. You'll see numbers change as the election gets closer.
  ​
• If nothing else, a good showing by whoever Biden's main opponent is will force Biden to take some of the positions on the left. Some of us were able to give Clinton more than just grudging support because Sanders succeeded in pulling her off of the "center" on some issues.
  ​
• As AZPaul3 points out, there is a danger that whoever loses the nomination, their supporters will sit out the election (or vothe third party, which is essentially the same thing). The smart candidate will realize that the Democratic Party is a coalition of different viewpoints and beliefs and, regardless where their main support comes from, will offer some compromises to form as broad a consensus as possible. (I see this as potentially Sanders' greatest weakness.)
  ​
• As DC8S pointed out in another thread, many of the policies promoted by the "radicals" have the support of majorities of Americans - which is why I keep writing "center" in quotes. I cannot for the life of me figure out how this can't be turned into a winning campaign.
  ​
• Trying to decide who is more "electable" is a mug's game. Right now Republican operatives are digging dirt and gaffes on all the likely nominees, and once the nominee is chosen the conservative smear machine go into full force and the nominee will absolutely become a hell ofa lot less electable. Support the candidate you like, and if you answer polls do it truthfully. I believe the primaries will select the most "electable" candidate.

That's what I said about Ronald Reagan.Then I said it again about George W. Bush.THERE IS NO BOTTOM, PEOPLE!

From The New York Times: Climate Change Takes Center Stage as Biden and Warren Release PlansIn a move that surprised me, centrist candidate Biden unveiled an ambitious plan to try to deal with the upcoming climate crisis. Although I suspect the NYT may be reflexively joining itself to the centrist candidate, I am hopeful there is something to his plans. Of course, I would support the Democratic nominee no matter who it is, but I feel that the climate crisis is the single most important issue of this election; although Biden is way down my preference list, if Biden is serious about this then I'll be able to support his candidacy with some enthusiasm if he is the nominee.

Friday's column by Paul Krugman: Liberal Wonks, or at Least Elizabeth Warren, Have a Plan for ThatAn interesting column by Krugman. He compares Warren's campaign favorably with the other candidates for the Democratic nomination. While the other candidates' campaigns consist largely of platitutudes and very broad, general "visions", Warren is offering more specific, detailed plans about what she wants to do.Furthermore, actual experts in the relevant fields point out that most of her ideas are workable and arguably necessary.Even better, her idea resonate and are supported by large proportions of the electorate.The reason I find Krugman's column interesting is that I had him pegged as an Establishment Liberal. In 2016 (when I started reading his columns), he was rather critical of Sanders and clearly supported Clinton. While half his criticisms were cogent (and interesting to read), the other half, to me, seemed to miss the point of Sanders' campaign.But over the years, I've noticed him supporting more progressive policies and candidates. So either I misread him years ago, or Trump and the nihilist party has moved him to the left.Or maybe he just appreciates a politician who actually knows what she's talking about.

From The New York Times: Elizabeth Warren’s Latest Plan: Expanding Voting AccessElizabeth Warren has presented her ideas to correct some of the flaws in US elections. By the way, although it is the states' responsibility to run elections, the Constitution does allow the Federal government to regulate the process.

I would be far happier if the Democratic nomination turned out to be between Warren and Harris than between Sanders and Biden.Am I the only one?

Tuesday's column by Paul Krugman: The Moochers of Middle AmericaKrugman mentions how Biden was pwned by Harris in the debates and how this increases the chance that a progressive candidate will get the Democratic nomination. And now the Establishment Liberals are wringing their hands, spouting the usual "conventional wisdom" about how only a "moderate" candidate can possibly beat Trump. As far as the first point is concerned, Krugman says what I've been saying: seeing how the "radical" Democrats' proposals are so popular, it should be easy to turn them into a winning campaign.The second point, Krugman points out that unlike Trump's tax cuts, Democrats' spending proposals would do much to help working people, and so should provide a boost to the economy.Finally, as far as the third point, Krugman talks about the so-called "moochers", many of whom live in conservative areas. One example is Kentucky: Edited by Chiroptera, : Boy, my proof reading skills are awful!

Youngest president in US history?

Fun fact: Teddy was the youngest person (so far) to become President of the US, but JFK was the youngest person to win a Presidential election.

NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll Results & AnalysisI've been claiming that much of the positions of the so-called "radical left" are supported by majorities of Americans. This is a recent poll on this. Bullet points are directly quoted from the website.

• Americans support so-called common sense gun policies, especially requiring background checks for gun purchases at gun shows or other private sales. In fact, requiring background checks is overwhelmingly thought to be a good idea (89%) and receives widespread bipartisan support.
  ​
• Americans (70%) favor Medicare for all who want it, that is, a choice between a national health insurance program or their own private insurance.
  ​
• A slim majority of Americans (51%) assert that repealing Obamacare is a bad idea.
  ​
• Nearly two in three Americans (64%) think it is a good idea to provide a pathway to citizenship for immigrants who are in the United States illegally.
  ​
• More than six in ten Americans (63%) consider a Green New Deal to address climate change by investing government money in green jobs and infrastructure to be a good idea.
  ​
• Bolstered by Democrats (88%) and independents (61%), more than six in ten Americans (62%) perceive implementing a wealth tax which imposes a higher tax rate on income exceeding one million dollars to be a positive idea.
  ​
• A majority of Americans (56%), including 84% of Democrats and a majority of independents (52%), also consider a national minimum wage of $15 an hour to be a good idea.
  ​
• A majority of Americans (53%), including 76% of Democrats and 52% of independents, say providing free college tuition at public colleges and universities is a good idea.

A few things, though, are unpopular. "Medicare-for-all" as the only option for health care is unpopular, as is providing free health care for illegal immigrants. There isn't much support for decriminalizing crossing the border illegally.And, surprisingly since a majority would not vote for a second term for Trump, abolishing the Electoral College doesn't have majority support.-I found a link to this poll from fivethirtyeight.com.

I was wondering how Trump could have possibly have been elected....