Dunno what the precise opposite of a Trump is, though I'm pretty sure I'd be behind it. However, the opposite of "liberal" would be "illiberal", or if you ask Google, "narrow-minded", "bigoted" and "reactionary".
4
The Republican Party and 45 are the bright beacon of a form of ‘nationalism’ that emboldens their ever diminishing base to desperately cling to Caucasian male privilege and preservation of individuals lacking at least college education equivalency based upon their white skin privilege while simultaneously inciting, engendering, and fomenting intense racial internecine, fervent xenophobia, extreme anti immigrant apprehension, virulent LGBTQ displeasure, and vociferous anti #MeToo hatred. This approach, harkening back to the 1968 Southern Strategy that elected Nixon, the current diminutively small sized occupant of the West Wing fine honed the race issue to campaign on, borrowing from the Central Park Five experience that racial denigration works. The GOP is hellbent to accentuate those efforts in 2020. And, the party of Lincoln will experience a more profound electoral loss as a result. The tax cut is a tax giveaway. The base isn’t receiving the benefits through wage increases, only a meager tax refund. The increasingly diverse Democratic Party, with a positive and productive view of the future, will advance and protect America for all persons here. The racial politics hyping fear and hate will incite a positive counter balance of moderate to liberal activism. The Democrats are the salvation of America. FDR and LBJ are proof positive, even with controversies. The GOP and 45 invoke 1935 Nuremburg tactics to scare and divide. We know the result of that ploy. Race matters.
2
I recognize that readers are news junkies, unable to look away fir even a second, but can we go a few months without discussing an election that is two years away?
I sincerely believe that some people tune out (don’t vote) because they are sick of the game of it. My greatest hope is that the next Democratic candidate is someone who is not “out there,” yet. Get a clue. The last three presidents that were elected were mostly unknowns. The majority of Americans desperately wish to avoid all politics, all the time.
2
I admire your optimism Mr. Blow, but unfortunately I can't share it. The "cultural" environment in this country is only going to get worse, and likely won't be healthy again for a generation.
And the problems won't fade when trump is out of office; he didn't create the problem, he exposed, it, whipped it up, amplified it, and legitimized it. It will live on, he'll continue his "tweeting" from trump tower, and his acolytes in congress won't be able to distance themselves from what they see as a winning formula.
4
Democrats need to focus on saving the nation from this autocratic president who seems determined to undermine our democracy as we know it. The Mueller report, the democrat controlled House and investigative reporters may bring information to light that would make Trump's re-election questionable. The democrat and independent voters need to turn out in 2020 to deny this autocrat the opportunity to enrich his family and cronies any further and as citizen Trump he will face New York legal entities already looking at the Trump family interests. Not a bright future for our narcissistic commander & chief and lover of dictators.
2
It is depressing to read that Trump's war chest far exceeds his predecessors. It goes to show that the monied who are supporting his incumbency in 2020 cares only for deregulation of Wall Street and the Environment. We can no longer blame 'just his base' since the deep-pocketed has proven that nothing speaks like more money lining their pockets. Diplomacy, decency, tolerance and truth no longer matter. Sad day for America.
3
Hillary Clinton to run again? I guess her motive must be to look increasingly pathetic as she ages. The only positive thing one can say about Mr. Trump is that he helped keep Hillary out of the White House, but the price we've paid for that is Mr. Trump. Let's not go through that again, it would be a no-win election once again. As to Ms. Clinton, she was a sufficiently pathetic candidate that she lost to Mr. Trump.
One would really have to dislike Ms. Clinton to wish for her to run again. To what end? For her to be utterly humiliated? Could you imagine losing to the Donald twice in a row? Let it go, Hillary. Let it go. Take your ill gotten gains and slink off somewhere that we don't know about. Leave the field to someone for whom one might develop some enthusiasm. There has to be some reason to vote for Mr. Trump's opponent other that that person is Mr. Trump's opponent.
So far Ms. Clinton has functioned as a gift to Mr. Trump and vice versa.
19
Our “best hope for restoration” after the national and international calamity that is the Fake President & Co.? Inexplicably not mentioned in this piece is an authentic populist and progressive, Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio. Brown can win in a large, strategic, conservative state that in the midterms elected a Republican governor and others. Brown has been, for decades in elective office, a champion of the working and middle classes in sharp contrast to the utter artifice and hypocrisy of Trump. Paired with an attractive, younger V.P. candidate, Cory Booker for example or Kamala Harris, would create a “dream team” for Democrats.
5
Try Biden (a sensible man) for a one term president with Beto O'Rourke (a charismatic man) as VP, then O'Rourke (now experienced & charismatic) for president in 2024 with maybe a woman, ? Kamala Harris as VP. Same pathway as Bush senior.(i.e. lost senate race, became VP then president.)
2
Odds are Trump will serve two terms. During this time many judges will be appointed. He must be salivating over the Dems moving increasingly toward a message of identity politics. Cory Booker? Kamilla Harris? Are you kidding me?
2
A new hope
The elections of 2018 have given me renewed hope. Just look where we were 2 years ago at this time, a great darkness had spread across America, Democrats had no voice, no power and no prospects that things would soon change. We expected it to be bad, and amazing it was ten times worse that we could ever imagine. But sanity has prevailed. Republicans, using every dirty trick in their bag of tricks, riding unprecedented economic good news, holding every lever of power, with all that...they still got their butts kicked on election day. Even the liars of the radio airwaves can't spin the numbers. In the blue states Republicans might as well not even run for office. The only republicans still standing in the TRI-state area are those who represent Long Island, and that's only because they promise not to raise property taxes, and no other reason, and even they may be swept away in 2020. In the Heart of the reddest red States a thriving resistance is growing, and the elections couldn't have been any closer. And this just some of the gains. The writing is on the wall for the MAGA crowd, and only the most brainwashed can't see it. If a booming economy resulted in a thrashing on election day, I have to believe, that if the long predicted recession breaks in the next two years, Trump and the movement he spawned will join the Edsel, New Coke and Betamax in the junkyard of history.
2020 means perfect vision.
2
I was just on a trip to Central America. Several natives of Belize, Guatemala and Honduras said that they were amazed that Americans elected Trump. Reason: “He is the type of corrupt leader we have had too often” or “He is like Central American leaders used to be”.
4
candidates who represent our best hope for restoration.
Restoration? To what? The pre Trump Status Quo? Uh uh. Ain't gonna happen. Change is what is needed and neither side has the guts or leadership which is why I predict another Trump win.
1
The Soviets will do everything in their power to foment a civil war.
1
Negative Mr.Blow: Perhaps there is an ideological war in the editorial pages of the Times newspaper, but for most folks, many could not even define the word, ideology which is the study of ideas. Talk to the average bloke out there, whether he or she is a cashier at PUBLIX,a mechanic at Lightning Auto Repair or the young lady who serves sausage biscuits and a senior coffee at Burger King every morning and calls me "sweetie!"Engage any 1 of them in an "ideological "discussion and you will get a bewildered look, impatient, already thinking about the next person in line!As far as decorum and decency are concerned, what news reporter wants that? You all thrive on controversy, not the Jerrod Browns or Michael Bloombergs of the political world. Folks like that don't sell newspapers, spike ratings! Connect with the folk: That's the answer!
1
The fragmentation of the country is the result of heightened Identity Politics. Trump astutely championed disaffected non-coastal whites, because they'd been the politically correct target of race-based resentment politics.
If the Democrats would stop alienating non-NPR-listening whites with their sneering contempt (and often outright hostility), Trump's ability to attract them would fade.
1
if someone looks at me cross-eyed I would be out of commission for a week. If I did anything to hurt someone I might not be able function at all. If someone hurt me I don't know if I could get out of bed. If five people thought I did a terrible reading it would take months for me to do another one. How these politicians absorb huge losses and still bounce back to do terrible things is beyond me. Is that something to admire or deplore? What do I know?
2
Trump is doing so much damage to the country that it may not matter who wins in 2020.
3
I believe the only escape from this civil war nightmare is to expose Trump so thoroughly that he is utterly discredited, and by extension all of those who aided and abetted him, which essentially is the entire Republican Party as it currently stands,
If he isn't, then even if Trump is defeated or doesn't run,the forces that have created this 30-year war against American democracy will just re-group, learn their lessons, continue to sabotage democracy and effective government, and eventually come back with Trump 2.0 -- a true right-wing dictator, smart and experienced enough in politics, not a spoiled baby in an orange toupee.
3
First off, we're not in an ideological civil war. Of course pundits with nothing better to do with their time have strong opinions, and hollywood, politicians, and on some issues a lot of people line up in firm opposition, but for the most part most people don't really care much one way or the other. If the economy is doing well, jobs are plentiful, the market keeps heading up, no one cares about Robert Mueller, or N. Korea, or climate change (prove it to yourself, look at how many comments most of the ridiculous climate alarm articles in the Times receive).
Hey, all politicians lie. So don't start with a ridiculous theme that someone needs to restore truth. Remember the ACA was supposed to reduce premiums, reduce costs, improve efficiency and health care generally. Remember that Russia wasn't our enemy, cold war was over? Remember Benghazi was just a spontaneous reaction to a film that dissed Muslims?
If you want to restore truth, I'd start at home, with the highly partisan and biased NY Times. You know, get opinion writers to present all relevant facts and not just the ones they like. Get the newsroom to be objective. That kind of thing.
And I'm sorry, you can slander whoever you want I suppose, but to pretend that Trump supporters and Repubs are racists and misogynists, etc., is the lowest form of demagoguery. It's insulting, and it shows your level of discourse. You ain't got much in your of tricks CB. You know that don't you?
Once again, Mr Blow doesn’t grasp the reality that Trump is the result of the problem, not the problem itself. And the greater part of the actual problem is the elitism and identity politics of the far left that sow the seeds which make such reactionary candidates electable. Keep failing to understand that “Trumpism” is a problem more with the left than the right, and nominate a socialist-style Democratic candidate in 2020 (with the NYT as your cheerleader) and you will all but guarantee Trump’s re-election. Seriously, haven’t the majority of us (centrists and nonextremists) suffered enough?
Well sure, Trump has raised a lot of money. But obviously he isn't planning to spend all that on campaigning! That's going into the fund for gold toilet seats and legal defense.
3
America just doesn't need trump period. Deport him.
2
Also, disgusting "public hanging" comment from
Hyde-Smith is in a middle of the battle for Mississippi Senate runoff, and hopefully will never hear from this repulsive candidate ever again.
Let her be drown forever in a swamp of her own party.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/17/politics/mississippi-senate-runoff-mike-espy-cindy-hyde-smith/index.html
2
I'm a lifelong liberal Democrat, and here are my thoughts:
If Hillary tries again, she'll be roundly, soundly, and deservedly defeated in the primaries. The Democrats would have to have a collective suicide wish to run her again.
Make the corporate-centrist, triangulating Democrats a thing of the past. The party was seriously led astray by the likes of the Clintons and Obama, who were the best moderate Republican presidents since Eisenhower. Democrats they were not. They used the presidency to join the oligarchy. Good for them. Now go away and stay away.
The Democratic Party should once again become the party of labor and regular working people. It should turn its back on all that lovely Wall Street money and remember what made it great, when it was great, and why it was great.
7
When the MAGA message appeared, it made little sense. But since then, Trump has made America ready for Blue MAGA hats.
3
Democrats don't need a "liberal Trump," but they must have a clear-eyed understanding of what they are up against. Not just who Trump is, but who his supporters are.
When I hear people discussing how this or that particular Democrat could defeat Trump by saying the right things, I wonder how many Trump supporters they know.
I happen to know many, and I fear that a careful and virtuous messaging on principles and policies could easily miss the mark or worse. Most of the Trumpists support him because he doesn't use the normal language of professional politicians and commentators. Distressingly many people are keen to watch him upend the political system despite his obvious disregard for legality.
Whomever the Democrats chose as their candidate must have very thick skin because Trump will get under it. To convince his supporters to abandon him, a successful challenger must not sound like the product of party group think. If that makes him or her sound like a "liberal Trump," so be it.
4
The focus on how much money has been raised speaks volumes. Are we electing a leader or buying an election? Looking back 2 years, there were valid reasons for voters to be angry and to vote against the system. The remedy is to give voters something to vote for -- be it a real revamping of the system so that elections are not bought, or an array of programs that invest in our people and infrastructure related in an easily understandable way to provide imepetus for voters to vote for something, rather than against the system. Are the Democrats, or enlightened Republicans capable of that?
3
I know that gender should not be a factor in the Democratic nominee, and that Dems should nominate the best candidate regardless of sex. Intellectually, I accept that it is okay to nominate yet another man.
But the heart wants what the heart wants, and mine glows for the prospect of electing a woman to the highest office in the country in 2020, the centennial of the ratification of women's right to vote.
We saw women turn against Trump and allow themselves to identify as and be proud of being feminists in the midterm elections; the women's vote is immensely powerful right now, and I think that it is worth factoring in the gender of the nominee for 2020.
5
@AMJ: Obama should have let the lady go first. He was a president too soon.
2
Does anyone else remember the initial attractiveness of a Trump campaign – that his effort would be self-funded, leaving the moneyed special interests on the sidelines? Of course now that it's morning he still respects us.
3
Trump has probably already pocketed the majority of that $100M, so I'm not sure I'd worry about it that much.
3
Mr. Blow's conception of "reconstruction" isn't a realistic one. Trumpism can't be banished by an election, or ten elections, without dealing with the underlying social and economic inequality, racism, and xenophobia that form its underpinnings. Neither Republicans nor Democrats, committed as they are to different versions of neoliberal capitalist austerity for ordinary working people, offer any inclusive, democratic, egalitarian alternative to the conditions that produce the problems I cited above. Pretending that we can return to some golden status quo ante Trump without a radical transformation in American society, one that requires very sharp social struggle and produces a political winner and a throughly defeated loser, is offering their own version of ideological comfort food rather than a sober analysis of what must be done. We should apply ourselves to organizing and creating a popular political alternative to the existing social order based on mass movements as a necessary precursor to the struggle that must of necessity precede the real reconstruction that must follow a popular victory. This is a matter of life and death both for ourselves, for all species, and for the planet. The time for politics and politicians as usual is over.
3
@john riehle: Just like you see no difference between Democrats and Republicans, I see no difference between Stalin and Hitler when you're talking about "social struggle". I do believe in voting however, and trying to change parties from within, and that applies to Democrats as well as Republicans. You have to come up with something original, something that hasn't been tried before. Like, universal health care, effectively fighting global warming and overpopulation, a liveable minimum wage, and caps on what an individual can earn in a year, such as taxing any personal income above $1M, no matter the source, with a 90% rate.
1
@john Riehle: Apparently many Trump supporters are millenarians who expect inevitable divine intervention to punish human excesses.
I am quite confident that Hillary Clinton would be an effective president. However, she has proven to be an incompetent campaigner, as shown in 2008, when she had a virtual lock on getting the party nomination. Sorry, Hillary, we need someone else. In my opinion, Joe Biden would have won in a runaway in 2016, and remains our best bet. Another four years of trump would be the swan song of the American dream, dissolved by the idiocy of guns, greed and gaw-wud.
2
@JSK: I don't expect Joe Biden to conduct an exorcism of God from the American psyche.
We are and we aren't. There is a cold civil war between the losers of the original Civil War and their ideological hangers on. As in the 1860s their lack of power is disguised by the means they win elections and probably by their love of guns. The fast majority of this country not only just voted against them but did so in 2008, and 2004 and 2000.
2
Reconstruction is the right word. How can it best be accomplished? Who should lead? How "radical" should it be? It was certainly botched the last time. Let's get it right this time. I believe we will be well served to remain calm and reflective, but also inspired and enthused. Lets not be afraid to be bold.
3
Here’s another name to consider: Sherrod Brown. He carried Ohio’s vote by a substantial margin even as the party lost most significant state races. Brown has a charism for speaking to the voting public about the dignity of work and he does so with passion and conviction. He has a message and is a convincing messenger!
4
@Milton Price, as the ranking member of the Senate Banking committee, I wish he were more skeptical of the dual mandate to the Federal Reserve Bank thrust upon it by a Congress incapable of competent fiscal policy. Monetary policy is not an effective substitute for incoherent taxation and spending.
1
Sherrod Brown! Progressive. Experienced. Heartland. Can carry the Rust Belt states.
Problem solved.
8
Precisely, Mr. Blow. Whoever replaces Trump will have to spend the entirety of his or her administration performing triage to what's left of our democracy as well as out foreign relations and standing in the world. It will make what Obama had to do after W left him an unwinable war and a tanking economy look like a warm-up act.
4
Because we threw billions at our racial problem does not mean it automatically should be fixed. Money alone does not fix a problem.
Since the 60's we spent a lot of resources to fix racism. Progress was made, but we did not eliminate it. This is today's frustration for whites and blacks.
Whites feel enough is enough. Blacks still get up every morning living in inferior neighborhoods and sending their children to inferior schools and want change.
The world recovered from World War II and its harder for us as to remain “King” of the world. We see our kingdom slipping in stature with whites thinking: "enough is enough. We poured billions into trying to lift blacks out of poverty and despair and they squandered it. We played Pontius Pilate washing away our guilt.
Gerrymandering, allowing political parties to carve up congressional districts to optimize their political clout is also a culprit.
The President, Congress and Senators are too busy raising money to stay in office to address the problem. Government needs a COO, Chief Operating Officer and/or Controller to measure and optimize results. Instead, once laws and regulations are passed no one pays attention and they move on to raising money and passing new laws, in that order. Until this is fixed not much will change.
@Sbanicki: "..."We" poured billions into trying to lift blacks out of poverty and despair and "they" squandered it..."??? Do you even consider Blacks American citizens?? Blacks my age grew up in a time they could not drink from the same fountains as whites, visit the same schools as whites, marry non-Blacks, sit in front of the bus if a white entered and wanted the seat, and you are basically saying they should forget ad forgive, because "we" (who's "we"?) poured billions of dollars into "trying to lift blacks out of poverty and despair"??? Who caused that poverty and despair in the first place?
1
After the midterms, I shudder to think how more openly racist Trump and the GOP will be in 2020.
Also, I expect that in 2020, the Republican Party, particularly in the Confederacy, will make next to impossible for people of color to vote.
1
What we need is somebody sane who can beat Trump - period. I don't care what "wing" of the party he or she comes from. This is an emergency. Trump is a real threat democracy, to humanity, and to all the living species on planet Earth.
7
Anyone who supports Trump is a traitor and must be stripped of their citizenship, as they are enemies of this great nation.
5
Biden/Booker - the experience of the experienced and some new bold blood as well. Nice complement. Both truly GOOD but able to take on all of Trump's (and Trumpsters') monstrosities. I doubt if Trump will be running because it's hard to run wearing a heavy ankle bracelet.
1
I think Kamala Harris will be the best candidate as long as she stays away from the illegal immigration topic as much as possible. She's a law enforcement proponent and doesn't appear too far to the left out of the main stream so she should appeal to some of the white middle class Dems Hillary lost because she was more concerned winning the Hispanic vote. Her looks will sure help her too.
1
@Glenn S.
If I was voting for which politician I most wanted to see in a bathing suit Kamala Harris would surely get my vote. Since you are offering her for President though I don't think her looks are going to be a factor. Not enough 18 year olds voting for it to be one of the considerations. Her willingness to smear Kavanaugh hurt her more than she will ever know. I will never even think about voting for her for that reason alone.
I didn't see Sherrod Brown in the lists offered here. He could beat Trump and would be a sound choice for the nation's future.
2
Biden runs in the primaries with committed choice for VP, Oprah who travels the country supporting Biden’s nomination.
After four years, he can decide if he will run in 2024 or leave the stage to Oprah. If Oprah declines to be Biden’s VP choice, Biden picks JFK grandson, Joe Kennedy III,as his VP candidate who is a bilingual ex-Peace Corps Volunteer.
Oprah os named Secretary of HHS.
Secretary/Senator Clinton, if she had been elected, would have worked 16+ hours a day, appointed the best people who could gain confirmation, and even reached across the aisle as she did as a Senator. However, there is no way she should run again. Her campaign was clueless beyond belief. For example, a donation to her campaign resulted in a bumper sticker--except that the delivery time was SIX TO EIGHT WEEKS! This was also a problem with the Kerry campaign. In contrast, Obama bumper stickers were like Halloween candy; and probably the same for Trump MAGAs if I have been fool enough to want one. Furthermore, it was impossible to communicate concerns to the Hillary Clinton campaign, even with attempts to reach members of her campaign leadership. In contrast, it was easy to reach the Obama campaigns. Electability is essential. And electability is what the very able Ms. Clinton lacks.
5
@Bob Hillier: Hillary has apparently been so beaten-up over the years that she trusts very few people.
Well if the Dems make the same mistake as they did in 2016 that was by focusing their attention to illegal immigrants instead of to the white working class like President Obama did you won't have to worry about winning in 2020. The Dems won't.
2
Mr. Blow writes, “We are in the middle of nothing short of an ideological civil war in this country." But he also claims that "We can’t continue with half the nation viewing the other half as enemies.”
I contend that it is too late to heal the breach. Nearly half this nation believes that ethnic minorities should be second class citizens, and has no problem with seeing Hispanic infants put in cages.
Nearly half this nation believes that women should not control their own bodies, and are nothing more than forced birthing vessels, even in the case of rape or incest.
Nearly half this nation has no problem with a “president” who says that the KKK and neo-Nazis are “very fine people”. Nearly half this nation has no problem with an exponential rise in hate crimes under Trump, alongside chants of “Jews will not replace us.”
We need to understand what this really means. This means that nearly half this nation is quite content to live their lives unfettered by the slightest conscience in this new, racist, bigoted America. And this is an America I want absolutely no part of.
The fact is that any candidate the Democrats run for President in 2020 will not be attractive to Trump voters. They want to keep this nation an ignorant, racist backwater of a country. Their lack of values, of even fundamental decency removes them from any type of meaningful civil discourse on the future of this country. And the sooner the rest of us may break free from them, the better.
6
@Donegal: Where one stands in all of this depends upon the relative importance of faith and reason to one's perspective.
Sorry Mr. Blow. We don't want Republican liars, crooks, racists and neo-fascists like McConnell and his minions walking back into civil society. We want them walking into the prison cells where they have long belonged. They started this cold Civil War we are suffering through, beginning with that vile fiend Newt Gingrich (who should lead the pack); and they need to pay the price for rigging elections, (2000, 2004, 2016, gerrymandering, voter suppression and intimidation, Russian hacking and trolling, Russian dirty money funneled through their terrorist arm, the NRA); for obstructing and subverting democratic institutions (Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Kemp, Kobach and the rest) and above all their 40 year campaign to turn the American people into serfs at the behest of their Koch Brothers owners. No more look forward not backwards, no more forgive and forget, no more reach across the aisle to fascists and racists who equate compromise with surrender. Nada. We want and expect and demand commissions, investigations, indictments, arrests, trials and jail for Republican criminals from Trump and his crooked family on down to the Republican dogcatcher. Each and every one of them. No reward for trying to destroy our democracy. No compromise with racists, fascists and seditionists. None.
11
1) Regarding Hillary - Oh God NO! The path was cleared for her in 2016 and we got Trump. Not a Hillary hater, but she shouldn’t even get into the primaries.
2) Trump has a ton of money - To the best of your abilities find out who they are and publish!
2
Just run someone with character, honesty, integrity. IOW - the opposite of Trump. The American people will respond to anyone who is an example for their kids.
4
The Dems don't stand a chance if they overfill the field. Hillary should say goodbye. Biden and Sanders are too old. It is time for the younger Turks to take over the reigns...but it seems the old Guard isn't willing to let go. We need to return to a country of the Rule of Law, not one-issue voters, or KoolAid imbibers. I don't want to see a fiasco like the GOP had in 2016 in which Trump was able to suck up all the headlines for free press coverage that make him a household name. Instead, I would like the DNC and DNCC to use their efforts to unite with an practical platform of policy, and the press to "nationalize" more of the potential candidates. For instance, few outside of the political-minded even know who Sherrod Brown of John Hickenlooper are. Without national attention, too many viable candidates will be lost in the shuffle and there will be no one who can carry the Standard of Democracy.
3
Democrats would be fools to run Hillary again. It is a recipe for disaster. She's fatally tainted, her husband would never pass muster with today's #MeToo so he would not be a helpful campaigner, she's a proven incompetent candidate, and her time has come and gone. America doesn't need a rehash of the 2016 race, which is precisely what we would have, re-electing a pig to the WH.
I'm a Progressive who's sick and tired of the Liberal insistence that Bernie couldn't have won, thus justifying Hillary stealing the nomination from him.
Drastic times call for drastic measures and running Hillary would be like waving a red flag in front of 300 million Americans.
3
@Ken Solin: You are disrespecting the millions who voted for Hillary Clinton (3M more than for Trump), and she did not steal the nomination from Bernie. It's obvious you never doubted the Republican smear campaigns and witch hunts against her and her husband that never came up with anything substantive except frivolous well-compensated accusations by some troubled women who were heavily coddled and courted by Republican operatives, dredged up again to appear with our Kittygrabber-in-Chief decades later because they couldn't beat Hillary on substance. But then, I assume neither you nor Bernie are Democrats (well, Bernie isn't one for sure), so please don't lecture Democrats about having nominated a competent and experienced Democrat for president.
2
“When people get in line that have absolutely no right to vote and they go around in circles. Sometimes they go to their car, put on a different hat, put on a different shirt, come in and vote again.”
--- President Trump
He’s right about this.
I know for a fact that right now there’s a guy in the White House who is wearing a President disguise.
12
Had he not been thrown under the bus by his own colleagues, I think Al Franken would have been a top contender for the office in 2020. He is an intelligent, personable liberal, who was never afraid to ask the tough questions, and was able to survive the liability of having a subtle sense of humor. I have not stopped regretting his departure, and I am not sanguine about facing the possibility of a Gillibrand candidacy, a worse choice to me than Clinton, for whom I would cheerfully vote (although I hope I won't need to).
5
Why should allow the people of Iowa have such a disproportionate voice in choosing a president? After all, Iowans sent Stephen King back to Congress. I hope that electoral sample is not what most of the United States wants. I propose that all democratic candidates agree not to campaign or allow surrogates to campaign in the Iowa caucuses
5
Two weeks ago the we all saw an influx of young Democratic women, many with diverse backgrounds, being sent to represent their states in Congress. Besides those whose names have received the most attention, there were the first two female Native Americans, Sharice David and Deb Haaland, ever to be elected to the House.
Finally we're witnessing a fairer representation of all of us, a movement to correct the imbalance of mostly white males who have held onto our governance for hundreds of years with a vice like grip. But lest we get too excited, this is not the case on both sides of the aisle. For instance, only one black woman, Mia Love, was elected by Republicans to come to the House in January. Just one. An even more startling fact is that of ALL female newcomers to Congress, 30 of the 31 are Democrats. The Left can be very proud of that.
Rather than speaking of reconstruction in the future, after the days of Trump are over, I believe we need to build a new construction rather than putting things back together to where they were before. Half of America has shown their willingness for fairer representation going forward; half of us want the diversity of gender and color; half of us want civility and decency to be the hallmarks of our leadership.
Now we set about finding a presidential candidate who can convince the other half that they'll be better off wanting the very same things that we do. We can only hope the current president hasn't ruined their ability to change.
2
This is one of the most useful and valuable opinion pieces I have ever read. I agree.
Charles, I hope you don't support Hillary again. Please not her.
4
Trump will try to push Dems to decide whether they are anti anti-white party quaking with identity whims or FDRs party committed to reducing inequality for all. Right now, the identitarians have the upper hand.
Another Blow column in which the best writing is in the extracts from other sources.
1
What this country desperately needs is to be made good again.
3
It is discouraging to me that any women throwing her name in the ring will face something that no man entering the race will. trump has given misogyny a new era where you can just walk around hating on women in front of everybody and it's fine. It's almost as if I have to choose a male candidate just to have a hope that they can defeat trump. How pathetic is that America?
Absolutely NO to Bernie. He is the reason we have trump. If he had just done what he intended and drawn her to the left and then walked away it would have been fine. But messiah complexes really mess with your head.
I'm very impressed with Kamala Harris. She seems like a smart person.
2
Clinton is the reason we have Trump.
3
@PeterC
No she's not. People like you are. People who vote for people who can't win just because it makes you happy. Put your country first. It's your civic duty.
2
So many "right" candidates--for present trends.
But don't anticipate that the market will stay up, that climate-related deaths will remain hidden and uncounted, or that war will present its bloody temptation. In two years too much can happen.
Trump's really concerned about the migrant caravan. Why not take the $106 million he's raised so far for 2020, plus the money being spent on keeping thousands of troops at the border, and spend it all on improving conditions in Honduras and Guatemala? Maybe that money could be used to improve police, to prevent gangs, to clean up neighborhoods and build better schools, and then the migrants could stay safely in their countries and not need to walk thousands of miles with small children to come here. The problem would be solved in the best way possible and we could stop being distracted by it and focus 100% of our energy on making our country better. Win win, right? Why spend money to run for re-election so you can maybe solve a problem in the future when you could solve the problem right now?
3
@Samuel Russell: Broken government compounded by overpopulation and climate change has only just begun to drive mass migrations.
2
When Obama was President I didn't give much thought to him except for big issues such as healthcare and immigration. I paid much more attention to what Gerry Brown was doing to balance the budget in California.
Now that Trump is President I have discovered how deeply racist some of his supporters are. I never knew how much they resented Obama. Funny what you learn when blatant racism and misogyny are thrown in your face everyday!
I like the list of candidates mentioned in the article. Let's see who rises to the top as long as it is not Hillary Clinton.
4
Good list of prospects, Charles, with one correction, courtesy of your own newspaper: "coal-investor and pro-impeachment activist Tom Steyer."
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/05/us/politics/prominent-environmentalist-helped-fund-coal-projects.html
In a interview yesterday (11/18) on PBS's Firing Line With Margaret Hoover, Tom Steyer said that he divested himself of all fossil fuel holdings three years ago, and is now an advocate for renewable energy resources.
1
@Mary the Librarian
Read the NYT link: "...an examination of those investments shows that even after his highly public divestment, the coal-related projects his firm bankrolled will generate tens of millions of tons of carbon pollution for years, if not decades, to come."
It's like divesting from a firearms company after you made millions, then calling yourself a gun-control advocate. He has a right to change his mind, but he should shut-up about being an 'environmentalist'.
1
We need someone who combines aspects of the following persons: Biden for connection to ordinary people, Sander's hard-hitting exposure of the rip of plutocrat, system. Truman's "give'em hell, Kennedy's idealism, Warren's fight for the little people, Swalwell's (Rep. from California) cool personality and good looks.
The only ones I can Biden and Kasich. Swalwell. I can't see Hilary - the Clintons are has-beens. Warren has compromised herself and will be shredded by Trump.
2
@Alexander
Biden acts senile and can't control his mouth. Kasich is wallpaper. Swalwell wants to nuke gun owners.
Go ahead.
Beto 2020!
2
None of these are 'liberal Trumps' except perhaps Avenatti, and certainly comparably idiotic, only in terms of being an equally vicious attack dog.
I hope Beto runs.
2
God please save our country......from the Clintons.......make them go away....far, far away.....and stay there.....forever.....
4
If we want a liar for President, re-elect Trump. Our value system in this country is a total disgrace. We are hated around the world. The rich are getting richer, The environment is becoming more polluted. More folks are losing healthcare...
Is this what America stands for? Disgusting!
4
“We can’t continue with half the nation viewing the other half as enemies.”
Not half...the #FeralThird. They are the voters who support the equivalent of a 6th grade bully throwing a tantrum...a totally unqualified sociopathic narcissist. There is no equivalency whatsoever. Enemy? Cancer? #28DaysLater affliction? You can call it what you want, but for the sake of the country, indeed, the world, it has to stop.
2
Great segment on MJ today about the new PBS documentary airing tomorrow: Documenting Hate: New American Nazis.
Definitely should put everyone on High Alert!
People, who don't know much about history, young millennials, older generation, rural and suburban should refresh this not such distant darkest years of world history.
http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/frontline-examines-new-american-nazis-1374732355704?v=raila&
Documenting Hate: New American Nazis
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/documenting-hate-new-american-nazis/
5
America doesn’t need a liberal Trump; it needs precisely the opposite of that. Before we in our parlor games settle on who has the best shot of winning, let’s examine our lists for the candidates who represent our best hope for restoration.
-----------
Charles, President Obama had 4 years in office. A mixed Hawaiin, reconstructed African-American he had 8 years to do the job, following up on his community service work on the South Side of Chicago... he simple could not get the job done with his impressive resume.
We need people who have worked their way up, and know how to create change on the ground. Promising Change is uplifting and might you elected once, even twice. But Americans are wary now, naturally...
You're lucky that as an affluent black man, race and "reconstruction" are the primary issues for you, not pocketbook ones. You are elite, your children have crossed over to the wealthy, white, connected Ivy League. Your problems are over.
As the NYT spokesman for black people now (with an assist from Roxanne Gay) you should understand that pocketbook issues are most important to most workers, black and white.
We're not rentiers out here. We haven't joined the clubs, and sports in the schools that will guarantee our career connections. Affirmative action doesn't reach all that many: it really is only the lucky few like you Blows...
We simply cannot afford to elect another promising Obama candidate, even if this one is full black, not mixed. Vote smarter.
@Midway Obama failed primarily because the Republicans blocked every single proposal he made.
No, he wasn't the best President ever but we never really go to see how good he might have been.
1
Blow is a leader in the abuse and overuse of the terms "racist" and "racism' that they have lost all meaning.
7
@jck
Your statement is concise and right on the money, my friend. Words like "racist" have been so overused in so many inapplicable contexts that it has lost its weight in connotative seriousness. This is also true of the comparison of Trump to Hitler. Many liberals enjoy using these expressions because it is a good way to shut down meaningful conversation in which the validity of their arguments are tested. Those who have so hackneyed these expressions surely have never read The Boy Who Cried Wolf, or at least did not take in the appropriate moral of the story. One day there might be an actual Nazi that runs for president, and when that person is compared to Hitler, it will be ignored.
3
Vulgar Trump is 'the bull in a china shop', willfully destroying even the appearance of order in his awful misrule, thrashing this presidency to smithereens. Given that 'we' were those electing him, it is our duty to ditch him and clean our act. We can, and must, do better. All we need are the 'ganas', and stop this 'criminal' before a full fascist regime is installed.
1
Hillary!
Mr. Blow I am so disappointed. I actually thought I would scroll further down and find the answer. We know Michelle Obama won't run so who could it possibly be?
“have excused or forgiven or even cheered hatred, misogyny, racism and division, ”
Trump is terrible! Resist with All means!
Now. Give me what I want and demand as I have for years! Trump? Eh.
Give me give me give me!
Oh, puh-leaze. Can’t we have a little time off. That election coverage does not have to happen NOW!
Mitch Landrieu.
3
@Andy: Definitely one of the more credible contenders.
2
Haven't we had enough of the Clintons. If she runs again, as in baseball, three strikes and you're out.
2
The Democrat party, more and more, are becoming the anti-white party. For most of its history, starting with the inception of programs like Affirmative Action, which is nothing short of government-sanctioned racism for the benefit of certain minorities, the platform of the Democrat party is antithetical to the progress of white men, though not all white men. Mostly, socioeconomically middle-class and below. (Those who are super rich, have the right connections, or the right last name [Bush, Clinton, Kennedy, etc.] don't feel this unwarrantable brunt.) This is justified under the featherheaded belief that all whites hold some stolen privilege that is rightfully being returned. There is a faction of the Democrat party that is now popularizing the shaming of white women, accusing any white women who votes Republicans to be anti-feminists who lives under the complete autonomy of their white husbands. This all stems from and is justified by American liberalism, which has virtually taking over the Democrat party. And when white people try to discuss this, they're met with sarcasm, with terms like "white fragility," and then blamed for not wanting to participate in a serious national discourse about race in this country, which would be more like a one-sided, demonizing monologue of "whiteness," as opposed to a productive back-and-forth. Liberals do not care about this ideological toxicity, as they happily wait till white people take the inevitable minority status in this country.
1
@Xyce: Democrats believe there are no important racial distinctions in human nature. We all share the same senses and emotion set if we are fortunate in our health.
2
@Steve Bolger
Someone needs to tell them that, then, because right now they are fighting tooth and nail to keep Affirmative Action, government-sanctioned racism against white people.
His name is Bernie.
2
Citizens United needs to be overturned. I don't read Charles Blow to get a breakdown of who has raised what for the next presidential election cycle.
I read Charles Blow to tell us how the way in which is broken and we need to reverse Citizens United.
2
Democrats gain 37 seats and counting.
“I like people that weren't captured."
--- Donald Trump
Yeah.
Me too.
2
Mr. Blow neglected to mention the candidate best positioned to unite a majority of the country behind a progressive agenda: Sherrod Brown. The Senator just was re-elected to his third term from the ultimate swing state, Ohio. Read this: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/us/politics/sherrod-brown-ohio-president.html
And read this: https://www.yahoo.com/news/want-beat-trump-2020-look-sherrod-browns-latest-big-win-ohio-100008235.html?.tsrc=fauxdal&fbclid=IwAR3H84AjBjRygF2JUsUuCSm2MZvI1WF564y4DaOeWr-BFgxpcZHfvSCaQkM
3
“Hillary Will Run Again.” Or, is it, “Hillary Will Run Again?” Wednesday Thursday Friday!!?? And, it's only Monday.
Chuck, she never said she was not going to run. At least in a way that was believable.
How can you guarantee your liberal nominee will win? Support Jeb(#I'm next) or Romney or some other RINO in the primaries.
Hillary, I’m begging you. Please don’t run again. Feel free to support any and all Democratic candidates, but please spare us the embarrassment of watching you return again to Chapaqua in defeat.
I think any combination of Gillibrand, Sherrod Brown, Kamala Harris, and perhaps Booker might work. It would be interesting, Mr. Blow, to see who your personal favorites are. Maybe address that in a future column?
Michael Avenatti is on Mr Blow's list of possible Demovratic candidates. Does he still have a shot?
@BD: At best, Avenatti can out-chase an ambulance.
1
Charles Blow [November 19] left out the only person who has the depth, the breadth, the vision, and, yes, the money to mount a campaign and be our next president. And he is right there today--just one column away from Mr. Blow's column on the op-ed page. Michael R. Bloomberg!
Marshall De Bruhl
148 Elk Mountain Road
Asheville, N.C. 28804
828-230-8641
One word.
Beto.
2
Jewish people across the globe should really pay close attention to what's going on right now.
This would include prominent Jewish CEO,COO of multibillion companies like FB and other tech platforms that are transforming the whole eco system of information as we know it.
Prominent Jewish led financial company like Goldman Sachs and many others should be extremely careful in their financial transaction as being beyond doubt transparent, ethical and open, which is often not the case, I would say just the opposite.
Remember or reread history when Jewish bankers were blamed for all the ills of the world, anti-semitism became rampant and it's all ended in Holocaust Inferno resulting in complete devastation of western civilization.
PBS will broadcast this new documentary:
Documenting Hate: New American Nazis
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/documenting-hate-new-american-nazis/
We don't have to repeat dark history, we should never again.
Greed here is the real Culprit.
2
Michael Bloomberg checks all the boxes: Smart, world class philanthropist, politically experienced, a real entrepreneur, mindful of the environment and socially moderate. He has been giving to Democratic causes and candidates and is as anti Trump as Mr. Blow. Let's get him on the radar.
1
Bloomberg is a king-maker above the fray of elective politics now.
Bet on Beto.
O’Rourke for president, 2020.
2
You made no mention of Sharrod Brown.
Trump's adorable, deplorables
Just what we need, a circular firing squad of candidates.
Pleeze !! Hillary again, for real?
Dont the Dems know that her $$$M Clinton foundation, the Clinton dynasty and her desdain for the "deplorable" working class are why Trump won in 2016? People hate her more than Trump.
The country has plenty of talent, give someone else a break! Dont recycle the Clintons again and get Trump reelected!
1
"Sorry, Charlie. StarKist only wants Tuna that think outside the box."
And "Sorry" for those un-'Woke' "Throngs (who) are considering a candidacy" as the "Times" notes, based on; restoration, "Reconstruction", or "Reform" [Anand Giridharadas', "Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World"], and/or any other weak substitute for what is essential for a complete re-birthing of America, will be sorely disappointed that the only one who will grab, not the 'golden ring' of the supposed money and power based 'American Dream', but the 'true ring' of the real 'American Dream' of Democracy --- will be the first candidate to run-on and commit to being the strong and peaceful "Anti-Empire President" against the obviously deluded and dangerous Emperor Caesar Trumpius.
That's right --- actually 'far left' --- the fast coming continuation and completion of our essential American "Revolution Against Empire" [Justin du Rivage's deeply researched and definitive history of our initial one against Empire], will, IMHO, start-off with a; loud, public, sustained, 'in-the-streets', but totally non-violent "Shout (not shot) heard round the world" that will ignite (similar, but 10x over the "Occupy" movement) a mass movement 'from the people' (both from the left and right, as indicated by substantial research) for the completion of our original goal of bringing (beyond Bernie's shout) a Political/economic and social "Revolution Against EMPIRE" of, by, and for 'we the people'.
1
Trump will be in prison, so he is a fairly long shot to get reelected, although with his voters one cannot be certain. Love the photograph, don't they have any others? Whenever I see a photo of the trupians, it looks like the same one! Quite a galere.
Just say no to 'tax it all' Deval Patrick.
If you look up the word 'limousine liberal' in the dictionary you'll see a picture of him.
Mark Penn literally sent a chill down my spine. He might as well have said "Hannibal is at the gates." Meanwhile, we have Nero inside already. Would someone please knock some sense into Penn and the Clintons? Hillary Clinton equals eight years of Trump. I don't need a pollster to show me statistics. This is basic arithmetic. Hillary posses the power to subject the country to another four years of humiliation and institutional destruction. Another bid for presidency is the best way for her to accomplish these tasks. Enough already.
Charles, America has the right man in the right job and that will continue until the election in 2024.
1
Just two words about Hillary Clinton. She should really stay out of the next race. Too many opportunistic position in her political life: the disastrous war in Libia, the strong worning she sent to Iran ("we will annihilate them"), the attacks to the women that truly or not accused her husband, the total lack of charisma, the 35000 erased emails, the use of the democratic party to undermine the candidacy of others...do I have to continue.
Please, let us think about serious and coherent candidates that can strongly and convincingly debate that monstruosity that will be the next repubblican candidate.
1
''We can’t continue with half the nation viewing the other half as enemies.'' - Aye, but what if half are voting out of tribe, no matter how destructive it is to them, or their children ?
This is the case with many more of them voting for self over party or even country. They think they are voting for lower taxes (decidedly not), or saving their jobs. (not likely)
I have been saying this for quite some time - THAT side is irrelevant.
They are clearly the minority (proved 7 out of the last 8 elections by losing the popular vote) Not only is there a clear majority of Democrats, Progressives and true Liberals in the country, but there is 100,000,000 that also sit on the sideline in any given election.
I would submit they are waiting for a ''true'' (to the ideals) candidate to emerge before they wake up and vote. Conversely, they might as well, if their way of life, human rights and something else were on the verge or in the process of being taken away.
What the country needs is a clear and decisive super majority of Liberals/Progressives to form a government and implement policies that will benefit all of the country, and not just a select few.
It needs to happen before the other side will even begin to believe that there is a better way, or that they can be ruled by a woman or a minority.
Regards;
1
Mr. Blow: I offer the impenetrable, immoral mentality of someone like stone faced, closed minded Alice Stewart who openly admitted on the last Don Lemon program that she's completely committed to anything Trump does or says. In her own words: "Look I voted for him before and I'd do it again".
Or consider another Trump Thumper Stephen Moore who looks at everything in terms of profit--even swindled short term gains--for Trump's con job of tax benefits to the middle class: "Hey, everyone's makin money!"
Along with a solid progressive platform and thorough knowledge of how government works, Democrats need someone who will overwhelmingly galvanize voters- particularly YOUNGER voters.
Anyone who comes within 2.5% points of Ted Cruz in Texas would be a good place to start!
**BETO 2020**
2
Mr Blow is right both about what we need and how hard it will be to find the right person(s) who can lead Americans to that social, psychological, ethical and political place.
If the "centre" is to hold, (see Yeats; Achebe), then we will need shared, universal values based on truth, pragmatism, fairness and accountability. Only those capable of inspiring others to find comfort in both the promise and the realization of such values can unify us once again as a people.
Strike that, "once again" is not the objective, nor is it truthful. "Once again" is too much like MAGA whether as an official campaign slogan as with Trump or as an implicit one as with Hitler (you an look it up). Tragically, the right wing politicos of our country have usurped the language of our seminal documents to support their propaganda. We need leaders who will take back, not just the documents but the passion and vision that constituted their foundation.
We the people must be forward looking. Able to understand that social transformation today requires life long learning. That our form of national government must reinforce that human need, if not political right, in order for our people to live lives that are fulfilling and productive in a changing socio-economic world.
Ironically, we can learn from Germay to confront historical truth and move on from unspeakable horrors inflicted by some on others. It starts with honest history and honest accountability; it continues with life long learning.
The only good that has come out of Trump's presidency are your columns.
2
America needs a Trump on policy with the probity of a Pence. Nikki Haley 2024.
The photo of MAGA supporters reminds me of the crowds that use to pack TV game shows, especially The Price Is Right. The game show is in the Oval, people.
Look, Kevin McCarthy will be the minority leader in the House come January. He's the head of the GOP in California, a crash and burn Party decimated by the electorate and relegated to Third World status in my State. They have no plan, no money, no ideology, no concepts, and the home owning electorate has to SALT deduction to fall back on while they listen to the Kook in the Oval tell them about caravans of criminals breaking across the border. And it's spreading: the GOP in the west is now a shell of a party and it's getting worse.
Yup, keep spreading lies about brown people and women, keep flailing around and make fantastic pronouncements with no hope of real solutions, keep giving tax dollars to the 1%, and the GOP will even collapse in Texas.
Reconstruction requires the implosion of the GOP as an entity and a anti-fascist GOP must come from the ashes if the two-party system is to survive. The elections from two weeks ago is a start. Trumps' running in 2020 will kill the beast.
2
"Before we in our parlor games settle on who has the best shot of winning, let’s examine our lists for the candidates who represent our best hope for restoration."
Wrong order. First, you need a list of candidates who have the best chance of winning; then look at those who are on that list and haveare the best hope for restoration. A perfect candidate who loses does less good than a fair candidate who wins.
2
Why would anyone, liberal or not, vote for the president in any form he might morph into? No matter what his mouth says, he will be no different than what he is, a bigoted, uber privileged older white man who expects people to do as he says. He doesn’t care about civil rights or social status unless it means he is about to profit either politically or financially from it. Hillary is done, and the Democrats have less than two years to get over themselves and present a ticket which will bring this country back from the brink of fascism. The big question is can they do that with all the hate bots out there pushing the buttons and diverting attention away from the republican goal of turning this nation into another fanatic theological dictatorship intent on the absolute control of you and your life. Time to take off the gloves, because the man who would be king is not our friend and is leading us into desolation, no matter how good your stock portfolio looks right now.
It is interesting how the electoral college opted for "slave driver." The Dems could also go too far and explain themselves out of clear message and run aground in the voting booth, again. Keep in mind the Republicans could hatch similar "new directions" if Massa retired to the plantation before 2020. Not a slam dunk.
Best you have ever written Charles. Patriotic in the truest sense.
To paraphrase that noted socialist Abraham Lincoln, this nation cannot endure, permanently half Fox and half free
2
When considering the issue of Reconstruction, I’d recommend that Democrats everywhere pin the following points to their message boards:
1. Remember that in many districts Democrats didn’t so much win as Trump lost (this may not be entirely true but it would be prudent to look at the results through that prism).
2. Don’t think that this message is lost on the Republican leadership.
3. Assume that they are planning to find a way to dump Trump before he torpedoes their chances again at the next election.
4. The most likely way they will try to do this without losing his base is to use the well worn strategy of blaming the Democrats, in this case for the Mueller investigation. Watch for them to quietly encourage rather than suppress its release.
5. Remember that he is the ideal person to run against. In this respect the fact that he has raised so much money is really good news.
6. Nothing is what it’s seems, be careful what you wish for and remember that this is a game of chess not checkers.
2
ok how about this: sherrod/klobuchar? We have the coasts. We need to pick up PA, OH, MI, WI and we're home. Thoughts?
2
I always find photos of Trump supporters interesting.
They really do believe that they are a priority of the 1%, when it is the 1% that is soaking them, because, apparently, billionaires still don't have enough of their own money, the poor things.
The used are CHEERING for their users. truly beliving that carrying water for the 1% magically translates into personal wealth; that Obama waved a magic wand just to make coal disappear, and Trump will wave his own wand and make it re-appear; that the stellar BLS employment and unemloyment numbers under Obama were fake news, but now are real under Trump; that Obama isn't a real American by birth; and that Saudi Arabia, which produced 15 of the 20 9/11 terrorists, is our friend.
The good news is that what I have described are a small group of people.
The bad news is that the Republian party en masse shamelessly kowtows to that small group.
Why is that? Why do Republicans accept from themselves everything they accused Obama of being (dictator, messiah, incompetent) but wasn't?
3
Excellent column and comments. Charles Blow, please write about the fact that to Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton, the vote for Speaker is the first vote for Hillary Clinton for President in 2020. Why don't people realize that if Hillary's breathing, Hillary's running. Look at the money she has squirreled away. Look at what Hillary and Bill are doing.
That spirit animal t-shirt is awesome!
This is exactly right: "America doesn’t need a liberal Trump; it needs precisely the opposite of that." Unfortunately the author, Trump's critics on both the left and right, and most of the news media, including this newspaper, have been trying to out-Trump Trump. It's almost as if they think they can win by throwing more mud at him than he throws at them without realizing that they're playing his game, a game he's likely to win, and if he loses he still wins. Even if you somehow defeat Trump at his own game you would just end up vindicating Trumpism. If you meet his bombast with bombast of your own, you lose. If you meet his name-calling with name-calling of your own ("racist," "fascist," etc.), you lose. If you meet his hyperbole with hyperbole of your own, you lose. If you meet his dishonesty with dishonesty of your own, you lose. And if you lose, we all lose. At this point, the Democratic base has been thoroughly Trumpified by the chest-thumping, the hair-pulling, the over-the-top rhetoric of Trump's many critics. The sort of candidate you say you want, the sort I want - sensible, modest, humble, honest [think Obama]- will never get the nomination. The base has been conditioned by Trump's critics (including the author of this column despite what he says he wants) to want a liberal version of Trump who will try to out-Trump Trump and who will very likely lose in 2020.
1
No on Clinton! Please Hillary, don’t do it! I begrudgingly voted for you in 2016 but I won’t do it again. We need someone younger, tough and dynamic! If you don’t match that description, stand aside!
1
"let’s examine our lists for the candidates who represent our best hope for restoration"
"Get ready for Hillary Clinton 4.0. More than 30 years in the making, this new version of Mrs. Clinton"
Ahh.....always good to see that we Democrats with stick with a tried and true lose game.
Why pick someone with a history of integrity, someone younger, someone without the massive rock suitcase of baggage named Bill?
Let's just stick with the lose game. Nice.
I will, henceforth, relax and ignore the 2020 election.
I already know the headlines:
"Trump Wins.....again".
2
"reconstruction of civil society in which those who are willing can walk away from Trumpism and back into a more normal political reality."
Sounds like a plan.
How about at the same time "walking away from faux socialism and hard Left anti-Semitism and PC identity politics" into a "more normal political reality"?
1
O’Malley/ Castro 2020 or O’Malley / Harris 2020.
Civility and Prosperity!
In the meantime not one of these prospective Democratic gladiators has had the nerve to step forward and make the big announcement: I'm --------------- and I'm running for president. For starters no one wants to be the front runner this early because it's the political kiss of death. (just ask Gary Hart) Democrats are also painfully aware that the front runner never gets the Democratic presidential nomination. (just ask Hillary Clinton who lost to 2008 Democratic nomination to the still unknown Barack Obama). And most important of all it's very hard to topple an incumbent president (just ask John Kerry who lost in 2004 to George W Bush).
For the time being everyone is content to play the "wait and see" game.
1
Can we count on the press/media to NOT give Trump so much free coverage?
4
Ironic that Charles Blow who has been doing little more than banging the anti-Trump drums and belittling and besmirching the millions who voted for him is now calling for the election in 2020 of a candidate who will restore civility to the national discussion. The hypocrisy here is astounding, but hardly surprising; like the pyromaniac who then jumps on the fire truck to respond to the blaze he himself set.
2
As for me, I just want a POTUS who actually does the job of POTUS.
2
So who do you recommend? Which ones on that list still make it under your criteria?
"Get ready for Hillary Clinton 4.0...this new version of Mrs. Clinton, when she runs for president in 2020, will come full circle—...and [she] won’t let a little thing like two stunning defeats stand in the way of her claim to the White House."
I hope this is simply a fantasy of Mark Penn's. We need to move on to a new Reconstruction. We do not need to go back and scrape open wounds that have begun to heal of themselves in spite of the trauma done to the nation by the election of Donald Trump.
If Hillary Clinton is serious, as Mr. Penn writes that she is (or might be), then this shoves off the table any number of perhaps viable Democratic candidates for 2020. Mrs. Clinton is an "oldie" and, depending upon your perspective, not a particularly memorable "goodie."
The Clinton brand was rejected by America in 2016, all things considered. That she won the popular vote by nearly 3-million votes does not ameliorate the fact that she would bring far too much baggage to a 2020 campaign against her tormenter. The far Right would salivate at an HRC redux: Benghazi; emails; "lock her up." They would exhume the rancid corpses of Bill Clinton's Gennifer Flowers and Paul Jones and Monica Lewinsky dalliances. She would bring too many distractions and reminders of 2016 when the DNC anointed her the party's leader, fracturing the rank and file and driving independents and millennials out of the process.
Mrs. Clinton's candidacy would be a red carpet for an awful president to be re-elected.
The only winner is not on this list of wannabe's, and his name is Beto! Youth, Energy, Charisma, name recognition, liberal policy chops, and the proven ability to raise vast amounts of money.
Just picture the image of trump opposite Beto on the debate stage. Ha, ha...
Trump in 2020?
I expect him to be dragged from the White House kicking and screaming before 2020.
2
I'd vote for Elizabeth Warren in a heartbeat. I can already hear the Republicans/Fox/Sinclair labelling her as a radical extremist, since the 0.1% hate and fear her, but then they'll say that about any Democrat. It's all they've got.
On the other hand, I'd gladly vote for Hillary again, too. The stuff about her supposedly thinking she has a "right" to be President is just a slur.
If Bernie "Now-I'm-a-Democrat-again!" Sanders runs, I'd like him to explain how he's going to get huge tax increases through Congress, or else shut up.
2
Need the opposite of Obama/Biden as in Biden/Booker or Biden/Harris. If had been Biden/Obama originally, we'd have Obama right now.
Unfortunately none of these candidates will be running against a normal individual. Furthermore, I am not sure the foaming at the mouth, MAGA hat wearing, white robe wearing, torch carrying, blood and earth swearing Trump supporter can return to the family of man. Sort of like zombies, once infected the disease cannot be cure.
2
Hillary should run again. Please do. She's not likely to win, but she could knock Trump off his message. She could slam the NRA without worrying if it will cost her votes. She could slam the tax cut crowd for selling our children into slavery with the debt. She could play "rope a dope" with Fox News. She could be Lucy to Trump's Charlie Brown. She could drive him nuts.
23
@caveman007 Reading your comment I hoped you were being sarcastic. God help us should HRC throw her hat in the ring again.
18
@caveman00
"She's not likely to win."
If you want to defeat trump than that's a really dumb idea isn't it?
In actuality I think she could win. She won last time by 3 million votes. However I don't think she should put herself through that again. She's done enough hard work for this country and it's time she rested on her laurels.
28
@caveman007 I too hope you are joking. I will leave the Democratic party if our party nominates her again. She is the only person on the planet who could have lost to him.
14
Someone who makes sense would be so nice.
1
"America doesn’t need a liberal Trump; it needs precisely the opposite of that."
Charles,
I don't suppose you purposely turn a blind eye on how the political landscape change since 2016, have you?
The political discourse has changed and there is no going back. There is no margin for timidity or hesitations. It's an all out war. You just said that yourself on October 7.2018.
What we need is unapologetic, in your face, strong-mined brawler. The road to WH-like or not-will run through the Midwest where 70% of voters are Whites. These voters worships a brawler who they can believe will fight day and night for them. To get these White voters back, we need a White man gladiator who will mercilessly takedown Trump in his own game.
And we must be clear: no women need apply.
1
I don't think Mr. Blow is saying we need to compromise values or ideals. It's about temperament and tone, and being a little strategic. It takes intellectual discipline to make our points forcefully without resorting to shouts and insults. We have leaders who can do that. We need another Obama, not an Avenatti.
For those who insist we need to win in 2020 at any cost: what do you propose to do with the other 49% - or even 40% - of the population? As a Foreign Service Officer, I served in countries where people were caught in cycles of hatred and violence that started years or decades earlier with grievances they couldn't even remember anymore. Is that going to be America fifty years from now?
1
@Katie, We do not need an Obama. We need an FDR, or a Teddy Roosevelt.
1
I agree even if the argument reminds me of the appeal of Jimmy Carter in the wake of Watergate. In my view he was a good President who was ultimately uninspiring and a victim of the economy of the time. But he barely won against a similar candidate and got crushed by a better communicator. So there are pros and cons to this argument, so whether the Democrats nominate an Amy Klobuchar or an Elizabeth Warren, it is crucial that they pick someone who will win. My problem is that I don't know which person or strategy that goal dictates.
1
The primary election system is completely broken. It is time for one of the parties to step up and herd all these kitties.
A schedule of primary dates should be set, perhaps three dates in February, April and June. States will be assigned placements on the schedule and the schedule will rotate every four years. This will reduce the Iowa/New Hampshire effect. It may even control some of the runaway costs, but let's not engage in pipe dreams. At least, it could make the process less ridiculous.
1
Mitch Landrieu has the message and charisma to draw the country back together. His speech on the occasion removing confederate monuments from New Orleans’ public spaces—“America is gumbo,” “America is jazz”—was one of the most inspiring in recent memory. It likely would not register with those whose white privilege has been validated by our 45th president. But it would resonate with the great middle who still want to believe their country is bigger than a collection of warring tribes.
70
@Steel Magnolia
Make America Jazzy Again!
5
The whole US political system is so fractured that most politicians never get national recognition.
1
In calling it mrerely “ideological”, Mr Blow understates the severity of our current civil war. And he makes the Second Reconstruction that will follow it sound much milder and sunnier than it will need to be. Such illusions serve no good purposes. And the other side does not allow them to distract it.
1
''We can’t continue with half the nation viewing the other half as enemies.'' - Aye, but what if half are voting out of tribe, no matter how destructive it is to them, or their children ?
This is the case with many more of them voting for self over party or even country. They think they are voting for lower taxes (decidedly not), or saving their jobs. (not likely)
I have been saying this for quite some time - THAT side is irrelevant.
They are clearly the minority (proved 7 out of the last 8 elections by losing the popular vote) Not only is there a clear majority of Democrats, Progressives and true Liberals in the country, but there is 100,000,000 that also sit on the sideline in any given election.
I would submit they are waiting for a ''true'' (to the ideals) candidate to emerge before they wake up and vote. Conversely, they might as well, if their way of life, human rights and something else were on the verge or in the process of being taken away.
What the country needs is a clear and decisive super majority of Liberals/Progressives to form a government and implement policies that will benefit all of the country, and not just a select few.
It needs to happen before the other side will even begin to believe that there is a better way, or that they can be ruled by a woman or a minority.
Regards
3
To begin with. America doesn't need another Trump. Liberal, tougher or otherwise -- because two years of this one has already been enough to send the country into a downward trajectory from which one can only hope we will survive.
This country also doesn't need any more sociopolitical division than it's facing now, which is why Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders might want to think twice before jumping back into the pool again.
There's no doubt those red-hat-wearing-"lock-her-up"-chanting crowds are already salivating at the prospect of jeering her back into the so-called swamp; which is yet another reason why they should be deprived of this satisfaction.
That said, at the moment I'm content to bask in the glow of the recent midterm elections knowing that this country is no longer ruled like a one-party communist state with the Democrats back in the House.
Sometimes good things do come in small packages.
4
Most people vote against someone for simple reasons rather than for something for complex reasons. Trump's genius lies in putting this fact to the most effective use. Like any bully, he is very good at disparaging and diminishing his opponents. It is, of course, the Democrats' right to decide which of their candidates is the most serious and credible, but none of that will matter to those who voted for Trump in 2016. The only way any Democrat could prevail in the general election is by giving simple reasons to vote against Trump.
1
If what is called for in a president is the antithesis of Trump, then a good place to start would be a candidate who truly understands the issues, and who takes the time to become fully informed about policy alternatives and their myriad implications. In short, we need a candidate who leads from information, reflection and considered judgment rather than from uninformed bias alone.
That should not be a high bar to set. Unfortunately, many in this country have dumbed down their expectations as a consequence of the present incumbent, hitching their wagons to a belief that harnessing one's emotions is sufficient, in and of itself, to lead a nation. It is not.
Righting the ship of state will, indeed, require a reconstruction of civil society. In order to achieve that, however, we will need a civil president who is capable of and committed to leading this great nation of ours out of the dark state in which is presently resides. That should not be too much to ask for.
2
Our weakening democratic norms may trick some liberals into thinking we need a liberal version of Trump--a person who fights for liberal-ish values at the expense of truth, honesty, and ethics. That's the biggest fear I have.
1
I don't like this column at all and I'm not convinced that it is because it is true. First, I'm exhausted from 2016 and 2018. If Trump wins again and the Republicans keep the Senate I believe that will signal the end of our democracy. That is, of course, assuming Trump would give up the office if defeated. He is a wannabe dictator and staying in office past his lawful term would be the obvious move for this felon. He has shown no respect for the laws of the land, why would he start then. My point is, this is all useless speculation. Elections mean nothing to Trump. More importantly, they mean nothing to his supporters and/or Republicans. Get ready for some extreme violence, folks. That is what is going to happen for better or worse.
4
Amy Klobuchar for President.
Here is why. We have a BAD Father figure in Trump. We need a GOOD mother figure. You know the one that can tell you the truth about yourself and get you to joyfully change your behavior without humiliating you. The one that loves you and all of us.
I have watched her on TV several times and she is always spot on with her criticism and opinions.
Amy Klobuchar for President. No kidding.
3
Hopefully by now most of the American left realizes that it'd be political suicide for the Democrats if Hillary ran again. Really, it'd be head-spinningly dumb to just allow the right-wing media and Trump to just dip into the trove of old narratives about emails and Benghazi. She could rebrand herself as a Trump-supporting republican and it still wouldn't matter. She's completely toxic to (at this point) well over half the country once you factor in all of the progressives (like myself) completely disillusioned by how she ran her campaign in 2016.
Honestly, the fact that her running is even considered a possibility by anybody at this point is pretty alarming.
3
@Kevin, I am a die hard Hillary fan. I have supported her since her spot-on health care attempt in the early 1990s. I certainly supported her over the callow Obama in 2008. But I agree with you 100%. HRC is the candidate the evil and organized GOP machine can only dream about. I fine her name in the conversation to be alarming.
Trump has over $100 million dollars and the Democrats still have candidates all over the spectrum... Come on, please DO NOT run Hillary... This is a recipe for disaster. All clinton-era democrats need to step aside. This isn't about age, we need the kind of energy that Bernie Sanders can drum up. The Democrats need to get their act together and do it now! Or we're going to have four more years of this maniac running our country into the ground.
1
What will happen to Trump supporters when he loses?
1
Its cute that Trump supporters are buying shirts hoping that Trump gets reelected and becomes our 46th President, as if that’s how the numbering works.
2
I agree completely. My concern is that the country is so racist and anti-women that a brown or woman candidate will have a strike against them from the beginning. Additionally, a progressive would fire up the right, not that they need that, and cause many in the middle to walk or vote for Trump again. I voted for Ms. Clinton, but we need to learn from that loss.
The 2020 candidates are underwhelming.
Bravo!!! to Michael Bloomberg donating !.88 Billion to John Hopkins University to provide low income students full excess to the best education, other fortune 500 corporations should follow the example, that's how history could be reverse to benefit and elevate average 99% of humanity.
1
I think President Kamala Harris has a nice ring, and I think she would make a very good president for the times in which we live.
1
All of Trump's democrat "progressive" competitors are mealy mouthed politicians and have zero chance of beating him in 2020. The democrats need a straight talking non-politician, but such a person does not exist on the "progressive" side. Obama was the ultimate with respect to the mealy mouth attribute.
Remember how people laughed about the huge number of Republicans at their debates? The kids’ table with the second-tier candidates going first? Get ready, Democrats — it’s our turn for the clown car.
1
The swift pace of technology and the enhancements it has brought to media research—read, vetting—have subjected political candidates to personal exposure like never before in our history. Add our no-holds-barred interpretation of “freedom of the press” along with the multi, multi-million dollar costs of a national campaign and it seems that anyone wishing to expose himself or herself to such cruel scrutiny and fund-raising verges on the masochistic.
Imagine how our history might have changed if the alleged affairs of Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt with Lucy Rutherfurd, Dwight Eisenhower with Kay Summersby, and John F. Kennedy with Judith Exner had been exposed as has been the alleged affair of President Bill Clinton with Monica Lewinsky.
We won’t even touch on the allegations of Thomas Jefferson’s twice or thrice-illegal and morally disgusting affair with the enclaved teenager, Sally Hemings.
If these self-righteous requirements for national success in politics continue unabated, no candidate will be “morally fit” to be elected or have access to sufficient “untainted” funding for a successful campaign.
1
Trump won't run and he will keep all the campaign contributions as payment for "a job well done". What a joke!
1
The headline and story are slightly mismatched, but both good to think about.
Inevitably, maybe not in 2020 or 2028, but somewhere down the road, the US will get a liberal Trump. Perhaps with all the fixins' - a foreign country's behind-the-scenes help, ludicrous statements, bad background. The question is, will liberals tomorrow act like conservatives today? Will they turn blind eyes to bad deeds? Unfortunately, Trump's supporters have exposed a flaw in human nature, a glitch, that may be universal.
As for the Democrats fighting to unseat Trump, the midterms may provide a useful guide. This isn't a time for radical outrage and far-flung plans, it's time to stay on message. Trump will lose, despite all the money in the world, if Democrats stay focused, avoid conspiracy thinking, and prioritize. That didn't happen in 2016, but it did in 2018.
Frankly, a Democrat could go far, in my book, if they assembled a prospective cabinet, people they'd want in key positions. Americans know the Presidency is more than a single person's job. That's what scares them - they imagine how the sausage is made. A candidate who took the bull by the horns and got some real people to commit to serving would calm many.
1
Our 2020 Democratic nominee should be a study in contrasts with Donald Trump.
Where Trump lies and panders to ignorance, we will be honest and factual.
Where Trump indulges bigotry and hatred, we will be inclusive and respectful.
Where Trump sells out our country, we will show what patriotism really looks like.
Where Trump thinks the rules don't apply to him, we will show what it means to be a nation of laws.
Where Trump looks backward, we will look forward.
Where Trump supports policies for the deep-pocketed, we will show how good governance can work for the rest of us.
And, yes, when Trump goes low, we will go high.
2
At first I thought the “make 45, 46...” T shirt was an awkward anti Trump slogan. It is in fact an ignorant slogan. If Trump (god forbid) were to be re-elected he would still be 45. The number is not based in the term served but the sequence of persons who serve.
1
You forgot Tulsi Gabbard from Hawaii. She has more legitimate crossover appeal than anyone on your list...without sacrificing any progressive chops.
16
@Rontrey Putin approves
2
Has it not occurred to anyone that America is simply broken and not repairable in its current condition? Trump is a manifestation of the country’s brokenness. No matter which politician you run against him, you do not return to civility or normalcy. Trump is Pandora’s Box and once opened, everything changed. There is no return to what was and the idea of running tired old Democrats in this changed environment may hand Trump a victory. To fix America, you will need new ideas, new approaches and nothing that resembles business as usual. As far as reconstruction goes, remember the first one failed. Call this second attempt Reconciliation or something that symbolizes a positive outcome.
1
Democratic pitch for 2020: Public college, single payer, tax reform, home finance reform, infrastructure bill, renewable energy, prison reform, clear safety nets for the elderly, living wages, strong western alliance, and police civil rights around the globe through sanctions and trade pressure.
People who can deliver this message: Bloomberg, Klobuchar, Gillum, Biden, Clinton, Holder, Kane, Gore, Warren, Harris ...
Trump is a sinking ship. Any of the above leaders have the skill set to steer in a new ship and save us.
You seriously believe he intends to leave?
1
Rebuild America: 2020. I completely agree, let’s not fall into love, or lust, just yet. And let Trump be Trump, performing for his Base, and turning away decent and intelligent people everywhere. HE makes George W. Bush sound like Cary Grant performing in a Noel Coward Play.
Seriously.
2
You don't get Reconstruction until *after* you win the war.
When Lincoln promised justice for all, malice toward none, he was making the fatal strategic mistake of being too forgiving and too lenient with those who had no interest in their redemption.
He was shot anyway, because mercy is a weakness this enemy (the racist strain in America) can never forgive.
1
I think Sherrod Brown and Stacey Abrams would be a winning ticket.
3
Mr. Blow should note here that #45 began campaigning for 2020 almost immediately after he took the oath of office. Thus his hefty coffers at present. My hope is that the Dems can have an efficient primary and have selected a clear-cut, popular and universally approved candidate who can convince those duped by Trump and his lies to see the truth, and vote accordingly.
there is bumper sticker in NH that says:
Any functioning adult 20/20
1
@Bonnie Rudner That’s funny!
I dunno, Charles. The first restoration didn’t go so good.
1
Charles, imagine if all those presidential hopefuls trekking to New Hampshire, took the time to visit each state in my New England and learn what kinds of reconstruction are needed to put people back to work. That would be step 1. Step 2 would be to send a representative to the Nordic countries to see models for what New England might be (I use Sweden):
Linköping SE - The entire road network is in perfect condition, new surfaces laid down by highly skilled teams. Same for E4 Linköping (Lkp) to Göteborg (Gbg).
Intercity bus system: Superior new buses, some running on biofuel, make trip Lkp-Gbg a pleasure. E4 and RV40 so smooth that trip almost as smooth as by rail.
Lkp - Entire city heated by district heating, hot water produced by heating using solid waste and forest waste as fuel at world's most advanced system Gärstad. Food waste converted to biogas at that plant. Human waste to biogas at nearby facility.
Umeå up north: University hospital heated and cooled by ground-source geothermal. Best renewable.
Farm country: Solar and wind large-scale installations.
New England-Natural gas, primitive buses, minimal use of all of the above, small efforts in VT toward renewable. To make New England Sweden would require advanced design, skilled workers, and funding. What candidate can become so well informed? Bernie was, no other.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Citizen US SE
1
@Larry Lundgren
You have a Swede named Johan Norberg--he belongs to some libertarian think tank--who made a documentary about how “America Should be More Like Sweden but not for the Reasons You Think.” I watched it on our PBS station.
I thought it must be a comedy. He points out that Sweden is not a socialist country, it’s a capitalist country, and the U. S. is a capitalist country, so the U. S. is just like Sweden. Sweden just has fewer regulations. Yes, regulations are the problem. In part of the program, he shows some weird inflatable air-bag helmet thing that’s very clever—it inflates if an accelerometer detects that your head is about to slam into the pavement. Then he says that Americans can’t have this sort of nifty stuff because we have too many regulations. Of course, I’d rather use a passive helmet until the nifty air bag thing can be shown to be at least as safe and reliable as a real helmet, but that doesn’t seem to matter to Mr. Norberg.
Then he tells us how all Swedish schools are private—but everyone can afford them. Swedish health care is all private also—but everyone gets health care. How can people afford this stuff? Because your government makes sure you can. Living wages, taxes, VAT. Mr. Norberg sort of glosses over that.
Yes, we should be more like you, but not for the reasons Mr. Norberg thinks. I’m so glad you have Sweden. Here, we have MAGA hats.
Can we please have a break from election coverage? It's too much to think about all the time. How about if the Times, WP, etc agree to no election coverage until after Thanksgiving, 2019. I think that would be a huge public service to the mental health of the nation. Please?
The trump supporter in the photo doesn't even realize that he is advocating for a new president with his "make 45 46" tshirt. Perfect example of the ignorance of trump's base.
1
What sort of leader stands in the ashes of Paradise, California, and fumbles the name of that burnt, hallowed ground by calling it “Pleasure” instead of “Paradise?”
Is it just a name?
Should we call Omaha Beach, “Ipanema?”
There is no insult that the White House won’t dump on California because it swears allegiance to the Flag but not to an administration of deflection, lies, innuendos, and abuse.
Democratic Representative from California’s 28th District, Adam “Schitt” (instead of Schiff ) might be clever spilling out of the mouth of a four-year-old, but does it identify Trump as worthy of the office he holds? Is it the measure of civility he demands from others?
Has the bully in the sandbox taken away Republicans’ spines and scared them into silence because their stock market investments, at least for now, remain up?
What sort of blinkers do people put on to NOT recognize the flames consuming the Party of Lincoln?
#SaveDemocracy
3
Getting the right candidate is obviously crucial but, as Socrates suggests, so is getting the GOP’s fingers off the election scales. And so is demonstrating which party really cares about ordinary Americans.
On the finger-on-the-scales side, Democrats would do well to take a page out of Stacey Abrams’ playbook here in GA. She has already won mutilple lawsuits on Kemp’s voter suppression efforts and is currently pursuing an even larger one, coupled with an ad campaign about making sure everyone’s vote counts and urging Georgians to come forward with their voting stories—efforts that are keeping voters engaged on issues of voter suppression and election integrity.
It is also crucial that Democrats devise a legislative agenda that demonstrates they are doing their jobs—while Republicans are sitting on their hands. Dems in the House could pass the bipartisan immigration reform bill the far right Freedom Caucus tanked—and thus take the wind out of Trump’s claims Dems want open borders so gangs and druglords can pour in to rape and kill, take our jobs and vote in disguise. They could do the same with infrastructure, family leave, the minimum wage, perhaps even something on healthcare—tee up an entire legislative plate. The Senate will never pass any of it—but that’s just the point. By 2020 voters should have no doubt which party cares about concerns—and which one does not.
154
By 2020 voters should have no doubt which party cares about THEIR concerns.
Proofreading obviously needs to be one of mine.
1
@Chriva.
To my knowledge, no one—certainly not Stacy Abrams—has alleged voter fraud in Georgia. What the Abrams campaign and many others have contended is that the Secretary of State swept too broadly in his purge of the voter rolls, removing the names of many Georgians who were actually eligible to vote, and that he was also overly strict in applying the “exact match” rule so that many other eligible voters were effectively denied their right the vote. I also understand that funding was not provided for the printing of sufficient provisional ballots in some precincts, so that some potentially eligible voters were simply turned away when the ballots ran out.
Those issues do not undermine the McBath victory. If anything—given that courts have already ruled twice that the Secretary of State’s purging and exact-matching efforts disproportionately excluded voters of color and since such voters more often than not vote Democratic—they tell us McBath likely would have won by an even greater margin than she actually did.
12
Two Words:
Beto O'Rourke
3
Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, why are these small, meaningless states given so much selecting power. And as for Hillary, enough already.
2
I already saw this movie.
It’s “The Maltese Falcon” where Humphrey Bogart (Mueller) says to Mary Astor (Trump), “You’re taking the fall.”
2
Wow! With only one legislative accomplishment under his belt in two years there sure is a lot of enthusiasm for getting nothing and supporting a run in 2020. I would call that a low energy administration.
At least we can see how low the bar is set for any challenger.
1
I appreciate the sentiment of healing, but the use of the term “Reconstruction” (understood that the author did not choose the headline) is exactly what we *don’t* need. As students of history will recall, Reconstruction was regarded by the South as occupation by a hostile power.
Hardly a winning tag line for a presidential election.
As for a third Hillary Clinton candidacy: while I admire Secretary Clinton’s resolve and resilience, selecting her as the Democratic nominee would prove that the party has a death wish,
One more point: this time around, can the Times’ news pages cover the race objectively rather than trying to steer it? I haven’t forgotten this paper’s 2015-2016 conduct in slanting its
news coverage toward Clinton, especially during the primaries.
2
I'm progressive, but recognize that there's a growing group of independent, mostly moderate voters out there who have NO SAY in primaries, so have NO SAY in which candidates run. Now couple that with the idea that the independent vote is the deciding factor in most elections.
To run a candidate who can actually win - and the point is to win - I think Dems should run open primaries AND use ranked choice. Independents pay for the election and should have a voice, plus this would actually reflect "democracy." Think about the 2016 GOP primaries: a glut of candidates - including several who weren't extreme - split the vote so much, the crazy man won. We don't want that to happen to Democrats. Ranked choice should prevent that outcome.
Granted, the resulting candidate might not be as leftist as straight Dem primary voters would select, but he/she WOULD enjoy support from a larger group of voters.
The thought of casting yet another ballot for Hillary feels like the last final desperate act. At this point hoping for a Reconstruction seems even less likely as a Second Coming.
@John Doe
Just to put this into perspective -- there is nothing that seems more like a "last final desperate act" than casting yet another ballot for Donald J. Trump.
It would take more than Reconstruction and a Second Coming to save the country after another four years of his presidency.
1
I would like to see Joe Biden flip back to Independent with Mitt Romney as running-mate. I can't imagine a scenario where the majority of us vote don't for that ticket. (Even Massachusetts elected that Republican and Obama-care was called Romney-care first.)
Most of us agree we need to start over. Most of us agree the 2016 election was a wake up call for both parties. Most of us agree on the core issues that have nothing to do with personal beliefs or social mores. We need leaders who will draw us to common ground, who can speak plainly to the people, and who have political experience. Leaders who can fundraise, who are familiar TV faces, who aren't perceived as Elitists. And - unfortunately - who aren't women and who aren't Black.
An Independent ticket decimates both parties and forces us to start over. Most of us can agree we are all craving change. Across all demographics - age, gender, education, income - we are unsatisfied. A successful Independent ticket allows us an opportunity to reinvent ourselves without the old stigmas of the stodgy, outdated parties. A winning Independent ticket gives us the freedom to eliminate the Electoral College, to blow a hole in the huge NRA lobby, and to oust the Old Guard.
Which is why Trump got elected in the first place - the overwhelming need for change. The country needs it, but he's not the solution to our problem. He's the catalyst that's moving us faster towards the bigger more permanent change.
1
Within the skill sets for international diplomacy and business negotiation, it is a rookie mistake to be unwilling to leave a pathway for opponents to walk away from positions that you do not want for them to hold. And so it is in politics. We do need to welcome those who can walk away from tacit acceptance of the overt expressions of racism, misogyny and extreme partisan intolerance that Trump has been cultivating within in his base.
It's easy to see this in the abstract, but socializing it as a shared goal for the Democratic primaries is far from landed. Can we identify the characteristics or types of track history that a candidate must have in order to lead in the restoration of political comity and return to social progress -- including the ability to nurture a pathway for rehabilitation from Trump-inspired hatefulness? Or are we doomed to selecting a Democratic candidate based on attitudes and preferences that are more easily manipulated by pretty speeches and PAC-lead advertising.
Hopefully Mr. Blow will more fully develop his theory of restoration leadership in these pages. Hopefully this notion will capture the imagination of centrists, liberal and progressives alike. For it is not enough to simply win; we need a leader who can help us heal.
No more Hillary Clinton! Three strikes and you're out! The same holds true for many of the other senior members of the democratic party for whom the same as unfortunately passed. I hope they stay as mentors, but no longer has candidates. There is so much good young talent available, and they must be allowed on the national stage so that we see who truly has the skills and shines the brightest.
2
Frankly, what you are describing in your column fits Bernie Sanders quite well. He's a fighter, but he does not go negative on his campaigning; and he's an idealist, but he's also a very strong pragmatist; and he's decidedly left of the aisle, but he has worked quite well with people on the other side of the aisle for decades--ever since he first became Mayor of Burlington, VT.
Do I think he'll get the nod? Probably not. But do I think he'd be excellent for the country as president? Absolutely.
2
What somebody thinks we "need" is not necessarily the same as what will win actual votes. Turning out voters is key to winning. Politicians have long been ignoring those who usually don't vote, but one day a candidate is going to move them into action and it will change America forever. Will that candidate be a Republican? Another HRC run would be the same as throwing in the towel and surrendering this valuable ground to the GOP.
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Let's focus on "who has the best shot at winning." Let's not get divided on just what "restoration" should involve -- inevitably there will be a lot of disagreement on that. Let's follow the famous dictum of Vince Lombardi, or whoever said it first: Wining isn't the main thing; it's the only thing.
Let's speed Trump out of the White House (and maybe even into the jail where he belongs). That's what this country needs now.
6
Chas. Blow usually gets things right but here he stops short of really saying what the Dems need --No, not a liberal Trump but an honest progressive, who is also tough and a fighter for his/her beliefs. That is the answer not only to the bully Trump but also to the arrogant partisan attack dogs in the Republican party. Let's have no more candidates who use the "high road" as a cover for fearing to tell the country forthrightly why he changed his mind to oppose a misguided war, or waiting a month to respond to Swift Boat attacks -- weakening his candidacy; or another who as president wasted his two first years showcasing moderation and extending a bipartisan hand, only to have bitten each time...Not bitter partisanship now but Dem candidates with solid core principles and the strength of conviction to stay unceasingly with them.
3
1. I think it's really funny how many comments below are long, as if we would, after reading Blow, invest time a hundred other takes.
2. This is one of those pieces that feels as if CB had a long night, felt the pressure of the deadline, and he just cranked it out in an hour, like a senior term paper.
4
Of course, Trump has unprecedented amount of campaign funds. His tax breaks made fat cats bloated felines. They show their appreciation with vast sums given with anticipation for much more to come. Their appetite for avoiding taxes is insatiable. Remember when one of their female pride members once roared: "only the poor pay taxes".
The politicians will promise great things for Joe Blow, who will hoot and holler their approval--then put their collective heads down and struggle to make ends meet.
'Citizens United' may prove the coup de grace for democratic election of officials in the U.S. of A.
4
Please, no Bernie Sanders. He brought us Trump. His time has come and gone. RIP Sanders.
4
@AV Agreed -No more Bernie. But it ws was Clinton's weak campaign and voters in a few key states who didn't show up at the polls that gave the election to Trump.
2
Recovering from the Trump disaster will be known as Reconstruction 2.0
And if the unthinkable happens, the US may well be done for.
1
At a minimum, one would like to think that it would dawn on a few of the hardscrabble Trump supporters that the president is doing almost nothing anymore except “campaigning” for 2020, with no end in sight.
There has been no discernible progress on healthcare, infrastructure, North Korea, their promised “Wall” (and thank God for that at least ) while the tax cuts have gone directly into the pockets of the mega -wealthy.
Tweeting, sowing chaos in the White House, watching and pontificating on Fox, attending rallies, and swanning off to one of his clubs to play golf, just about sums up how Trump’s time is spent. When occasionally forced out of his comfort zone on foreign soil, or even a progressive state like California, he scowls, blathers incoherently and whenever possible castigates his hosts. If any physical discomfort is involved in his duties i.e. walking or standing in the rain, he’s “outta there.”
Yet, as Charles reports here, the re-election money from rich donors keeps flowing in unchecked. Now why would that be!?
159
@Susan,
That this president typically only spends three hours a day actually working in the Oval Office used to anger me me. These days I consider it a blessing. The less time he puts into actually governing, the fewer chances of him making disastrous decisions that will damage us for years to come.
Let's encourage him to play more golf, spend more time on the phone with his cronies, traipse around the country for more rallies. Even three hours a day being an actual "Leader" is too much.
32
@Susan
Totally agree. By the way, did you notice that Putin was the only leader he smiled at?
29
@Susan given what is currently being spewed on Breitbart, the daily caller and just about any conservative blog or site, trump supporters are even more steadfast that the president has performed miracles, fulfilled every campaign promise and they are just waiting for the loaves and fishes followed by walking on water. You wait in vain.
8
I so wish Sen. Amy Klobachar of MN would run. She's the one person I can clearly see bringing dignity, calm and sensible leadership back to the White House.
2
supporters of Trump in order to repair the nation. But don't overlook the very real possibility that Republicans will put forward someone other than Trump – Niki Haley, Jeff Flake, or Mike Pence, perhaps. Almost anyone will seem capable and respectable by comparison, thus allowing Republicans to claim “see, we're not that crazy after all.” This has always been the bigger danger, which is why the message of Democrats is at least as important as the person who bears it.
4
No one personality can solve our problems, because they are structural. Big money leading to right wing districts locked down by gerrymandering, a slave era check on progressivism through the electoral college's power to negate the popular vote, the hegemony of rural power in the Senate over the will of more populous, diverse states, the hijacking of media outlets by propagandists to stoke division and violence, the monopolized economy, etc. Only successive waves of pounding democratic wins in state legislatures and on Capitol Hill can reverse the criminal enterprise that has hijacked our democracy.
4
One name seems to be conspicuously missing, Andrew Gillum. I predict that young man is the next Barack Obama. I had never heard of him before this year and he ran for Governor of Florida, but much like with Obama, when I heard him speak, I immediately took to him. Unlike most politicians, he made me feel like it wasn't about himself, he genuinely wants to move America forward, and after the self-serving, ego-driven roller coaster we've been on for the past two years, he restored my feeling of hope for the nation. He's also intelligent, likeable, and has great charisma. Remember where you heard it first.
64
@Eric L. Wattree: Why not Abrams? And she is a woman as well, so you can have it all.
11
Unfortunately, he's corrupt to the bone.
1
@matty Show us some evidence of this, not just a bold, unsourced, unsupported assertion.
14
In general, we just have deep ideological differences. There are certain values on which we will not see eye to eye. The list of oil-and-water issues, to name a couple, would be free speech vs. political correctness and legal immigration vs. illegal immigration. And, speaking of immigration, perhaps we would not be so divided if conservatives, in particular white conservatives, were not labeled, implicitly or otherwise, as racist, xenophobic, and wanton for not being unconditionally for illegal immigration. There is no compromise that is going to be made when the mantra of one side (the left) is "no border, no wall, no USA at all."
1
@Xyce
Name one dem in Congress who’s says “open borders”. That is a made up line to scare you. Don’t fall for it! No one wants illegal immigration just not mistreatment of said immigrants. There could be a solution but Tea Party Republicans block any bill every time.
1
@Palcah
One would be former Deputy Chair of the Democratic National Committee and former Representative of Minnesota's 5th congressional district (for which he chose not to run again in 2018, deciding to run for Attorney General of Minnesota, which he won) Keith Ellison who actually wore a t-shirt that read "I do not believe in borders."
But there not being a rising chorus in Congress who openly advocate this position does not disqualify the argument that Democrats are for illegal immigration: they refuse to fund the wall, they're the only party that refuses to cooperate with federal law enforcement to enforce immigration law (Sanctuary cities), and there are Democrats who won their congressional seats under with the slogan "abolish ICE." The prominent Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a case in point. Plus, you have a growing faction within the Democrat party that believes in and advocates for open borders.
Notice the sudden appearance of #ChecksAndBalanxes now that the midterms have made it clear to the Rep Donor Class that Trump's uility is exhausted. Clearly Trump himself is nervous -- pathetically pushing Pence to publicly sign on for a second helping. One play that's not beyond Trump as he flails is playing ball with Chuck and Nancy to prevent his premature swap out for Pence. Balance problems in an elderly person is highly predictive of a short remaining lifespan, so it's now a good bet that RGB won't make it through 2020. A President Pence would certainly replace her with another hard Righter. So Trump's best play is to discretely float the prospect of Merrick Garland as his next court pick (conditional of course on being treated 'fairly'). His marketing positions it as healing the great rift he has encouraged.
Klobuchar and Brown. Humble yet tough. Midwesterners. Harris too. Maybe Landrieu or O'Rourke as V.P.
1
I can't say anyone on that list of democratic presidential candidates really thrills me. Sanders and Biden are very old. Warren and her Native American heritage debacle makes me wonder about her judgement. Even saying the word Clinton should be reason enough to be put in an asylum for the deranged. I am hoping for a miracle.
6
You are right, Mr. Blow, America does not need a "liberal Trump," it simply needs Trump! I support the President. I support Trump. MAGA! Thank you.
3
I'd suggest a simple winnowing process for the citizenry to use in judging prospective Democratic presidential candidates:
Any candidate caught using ANY of Mr. Trump's campaigning techniques: lies; anger; slander; race-baiting; media-bashing; mockery; outrage; sexism; exaggeration; etc. (the list goes on) should automatically be rejected as unfit.
Some people have said that fighting Trump using Trump's own tools is a good idea. I disagree. When you fight fire with fire you usually get a larger conflagration. I'd like to see a fire extinguisher, not another flaming Tiki torch.
I remain, however, hopeful that Mr. Trump may no longer be a candidate by the time 2020 rolls around. I think his position is becoming increasingly precarious and his tenure uncertain.
And that is the key: "Restoration," along with ability and moral leadership. The list is indeed growing as to who will be our Democratic nominee. After experiencing the results of our House - and gubernatorial - elections, I believe we are on the right track. If we learned anything from these results, it is that more Americans than not want stable, capable, and ethical leadership. We are not ignorant as Trump would hope us to be. In fact, we are a threat to him and his sycophants in Congress and rabid followers. So, bring it on. We are ready.
Yet....as much as I respect Hillary Clinton's intelligence, experience, and ability, and that goes for Biden, also, we need a change from the old guard. That is not to say that we should go to extremes....God forbid, not after Trumpism. But we need perhaps the generation which follows the above, with equal attributes, and with a passion and an enthusiasm that comes with our younger politicians. In spite of Trump's war chest, we can put a Democrat in the White House in 2020. However, we have to do it right and with focus that s/he will be exactly what we need now more than ever.
2
Mr. Blow doesn't get it. We can't have a restoration of civil society until and unless all sides have something to win from it and lose from its opposite. This noble plea will be seen as mere weakness by people who have replaced rational thought with spittle-spewing hatred and belief in triumphalist end-game. No, they have to be hurt, and very badly, by the very conditions they have created. We've already seen reports showing that Trump counties continue to fail economically and socially as employment and young people leave and drugs move in at an ever-escalating rate. The cities are thriving. The Trumpist GOP wanted him to reverse this, and he cannot. No amount of 'nice' will fix this, their self-destruction must be complete before any lasting reconstruction can begin. I am actually neutral to the idea that Democrats be actively cruel, as their opposite numbers have been, during this interregnum, but time must pass before any healing is even possible.
32
@George, it agonizes me to agree with you. People don't change until they want to or have to, and pain is a great motivator. I feel only a tiny bit vindictive as I wish the pain of trumpism upon all the trumpists, especially the most virulent, until they own what they bought and their reversion to sanity is complete and committed. I just hope that, like Passover, the plague skips the good guys.
15
@CP
Human nature is such that the Trumpists will scapegoat and blame Democrats before they turn the spotlight on themselves --- no matter how logically and emphatically the guilt belongs with their thinking processes.
You mention Passover, which is a sore point with me. I don't know why punishing the innocent (and their children) whle sparing one's own side somehow reinforces our righteousness.
As angry and disgusted as we are with the right, they have to be lured back to a semblance of justice via the conviction that it is their own insight and not imposed on them in humiliation from a triumphant left.
9
Chas. Blow usually gets things right but here he stops short of really saying what the Dems need --No, not a liberal Trump but an honest progressive, who is also tough and a fighter for his/her beliefs. That is the answer not only to the bully Trump but also to the arrogant partisan attack dogs in the Republican party. Let's have no more candidates who use the "high road" as a cover for fearing to tell the country forthrightly why he changed his mind to oppose a misguided war, or waiting a month to respond to Swift Boat attacks -- weakening his candidacy; or another who as president wasted his two first years showcasing moderation and extending a bipartisan hand, only to have bitten each time...Not bitter partisanship now but Dem candidates with solid core principles and the strength of conviction to stay unceasingly with them.
1
Remember the 16 or 17 Republican establishment candidates that Trump bested by being his rude, crude, hateful, self? In retrospect, they’ve all become a blur. The bench was long, but not deep. That should be a cautionary tale for Democrats.
Hillary? Really? Bernie? Again? Biden, the only one who could have beaten Trump but hadn’t waited his turn in line long enough?
Don’t get me wrong, they and all of the others mentioned are better people on their worst days than Trump could ever be on his best day (if that ever happens). Yet knowing the Democrats, they’re already letting Trump's juggernaut define them, divide them and conquer them in much the same way as he did with those on his own side.
This time, it’s going to take a bully to beat a bully by shaming him with his own lies, corruption and treasonous collaboration with a sworn enemy of his own country. Anything less forceful will surely be suicide for Democrats, our democracy and our future. Is it too early to find that person or is too late? Until and unless we realize that the next election could be our last election, we won’t be able to properly gauge with any degree of certainty the strength of the boldest, most responsible, most electable Democratic candidate to lead us out of this national dystopia.
And while the midterms have generated unprecedented momentum, the next two years will require at least twice as much determination.
Time to pick up the pace.
1
Not ready to go out on a limb and suggest who that might be, Charles? We need someone with character, grit and honesty. What we need is someone very like Beto O'Rourke
2
The 2020 election will be won--or lost--during the Democratic Primary. The Republicans are stuck with Trump. So, they will attempt to use the only tools they have left--a partisan Department of Justice which can entrap and indict promising politicians, Russian Kompromat, the handful of news outlets that do not hate Trump for putting journalists in the line of fire (Fox and the National Enquirer), an army of paid political posters on sites like Facebook and an assortment of publicity hungry self styled "left wing" Americans who will declare that the Democrat's best candidates are all too "corporate." Will it work? Democrats in Congress already have their eyes on Whitaker and his vow to launch a Crusade against Democrats. I predict he will go the way of Alberto Gonzales. Americans are so inundated with "dirt" that they are likely to yawn at any new sex scandal. Fox and the National Enquirer alone can not turn the course of the Democratic Primary, because Democrats do not listen to them. No one believes what they read on Facebook anymore. That leaves publicity hungry self styled "leftists." There are lots of Americans who want to be famous and do not care who they have to please or what they have to do to achieve celebrity.
Were it not for the unfortunate fact that the Constitution prescribes an age limit of 35 years for anybody to be President, the Democrats have, apparently without having even realized it, the "Dream Team", who, alone by virtue of youth and charisma, would likely crush Trump, or anyone else the Republicans might put up in 2020: Beto O'rourke and Alexandra Occasio-Cortez.
By "anyone else" I visualize the guys who come to my mind when I hear the word "Republican", the kind of guys one reads about in the back section of the local newspaper, escapees from the old folks home, found walking down Main Street in the middle of the night in nothing but a pair of jockey shorts--dinosaurs like Orrin Hatch, John Cornyn, Charles Grassley, and Roy Blunt, That cadre of "homeys" that Mitch McConnell always has backing him up when he makes some sort of pronouncement at the microphone. Like what's that all about anyway? Isn't Mitch a big boy? Can't he stand up to the microphone and television camera by himself? Are we supposed to be intimidated by the symbolic gang of "tough guys" who have his back?
Sure, I know that the Democrats also have people like Bernie, who are chronologically old, but the don't seem old, because they have a young way of thinking.
We saw it over and over again this past election season. Pretenders to the throne, crashing and being burned, because no one, literally no one can imitate Trump. He is a one time electoral Nine Eleven. A phenomenon that is unrepeatable by anyone else probably ever. So any reparations that need to be made to the Office of the Presidency, will be axiomatic. Any President Elect even pretending to do anything close to Trumpian, would be laughed out of the White House.
1
It is all about the money in the system most of which many do not understand or notice. The world wishes the US well but please, do something!!
1
Maybe we could come up with a road map before we run a popularity contest. And being an old person, I'd just like to say, no old people.
2
My choice: Amy Klobuchar and Beto O'Rourke.
Please don't let Hilary run again. She is unelectable. It is another crucial election - there is no way we should lose to Trump again. This country won't survive another four with Trump. Democrats need a charismatic smart experienced candidate. Hilary and Bill should take their boxing gloves off and stay out of the political arena - it is time for fresh blood They are done, done, done. Look at Senator Kamala Harris, Beto O'Rourke, Sanders, Swalwell.
We need a political intervention and Bernie Sanders is the one to lead it.
We wake up from this daze we have been in for forty years that let the 1% cripple our children and grandchildrens futures with college dept , pollution , healthcare that is the laughingstock of the world and a military that needs 60-70 billion in budget increases yearly or even simple immigrant caravans will defeat us.
if the Corporate Democrats rig the primary's again giving us a crooked Hillary or any other Shill I will never vote for that party again.
2
It's time for Democrats to return to the "Democratic wing of the Democratic party".
No more neoconservatism, no more triangulation. No more trying to meet conservatives, Republicans, and their oligarchic libertarian overlords more than halfway. Reject that Wall Street and big corporate money--in fact, campaign on public funding of all elections with only small (three figure) private donations allowed. Stand for something--in fact, many somethings:
--Big money out of politics (as above)
--A public option for health insurance: what we should have pushed for under Obama. It will be the wedge that eventually separates insurance from employment status and help renew entrepreneurial energies.
--NATIONWIDE voting standards. To allow state by state, or even county by county, differences in the election process is ludicrous. The very fact that a Voting Rights Act and a Poll Tax Amendment were even necessary shows why these are needed. There is NO states' rights argument here.
--A massive infrastructure initiative, which included retraining of those in dying industries in areas like green energy and communications tech.
--Pay for that with a re-establishment of a progressive tax system, with much higher percentages for the seven figure crowd, and the big inheritance crowd. And tax capital gains similarly. And eliminate the stupid Social Security cap.
Space is limited here; feel free to add. But give people reasons to vote Democratic.
192
@Glenn Ribotsky: FDR had the "New Deal," and HST the "Fair Deal." JFK advocated a dynamic forward strategy (sounds like MAGA?). LBJ had a vision of a "Great Society." Has any Democrat in the past half century had any uplifting vision to propose to the American people? Therein lies the answer.
3
@Glenn Ribotsky
With the exception of single payer, just about any Democratic candidate would fully support these positions. In addition, they would restore the EPA to its rightful status as a true regulatory agency, re-engage with the rest of the world on addressing man-made climate change, appoint judges and justices who are not right wing, redress the neutering of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, advocate for treating foreign allies like allies, and represent the nation with at least a modicum of honor and decency.
But starting every single discussion of the necessary qualities for a Democratic candidate with a commitment to single payer, and not budging an inch from that position, could well forfeit all of the above, in 2020 and beyond.
18
@Glenn Ribotsky
Military spending and war. No one is talking about this. Polls indicate that Americans are sick of never-ending wars and bloated military budgets. Pelosi and Schumer have backed Trump’s request for more military spending. We pour trillions of dollars into lost causes - money that could be spent more productively elsewhere.
19
Trump's fundraising may seem impressive but who thinks he plans to actually spend that money on his re-election efforts. I'll bet you a wall paid for by Mexico that most of that money ends up going to his resorts and businesses where I am sure he plans to hold a lot of "campaign events", etc. And he will continue to count on the media for all the free coverage he could ever want
When I read tonight that Trump has tweeted about “Adam Shitt” instead of Adam Shiff, this time I didn’t feel anger as I usually do when Trump does something hateful or idiotic. I was hit with a wave of sadness. I am sad for our country that we have a President of such low moral fiber, such indecency, such meanness of spirit. I cannot imagine anyone up to the task of repairing what has been broken in our country. How will this great divide be mended in my lifetime?
It is terribly depressing that we are a laughing stock in the world when we used to be admired. I know we certainly weren’t perfect but I always felt that our country’s trajectory was upwards and that we were working towards something good. I am quite pessimistic about getting our country back. I honestly think Trump might win another term. He keeps getting worse, devolving more and more. No one steps up to stop him.
Who is up to the task of this major reconstruction? Who would want to attempt it? It seems Herculean.
4
Nominate Elizabeth Warren w/ Sherrod Brown as VP. Form a coalition of middle class/working class/young/minority voters. Put particular emphasis on get out the vote efforts in battleground states. Focus on winning in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin etc. Florida MUST be prepared for an extremely close election in which every vote counts (Paying attention Broward? Miami-Dade?). Under NO circumstances should Hillary run again. Even if she were to win, her administration would be hampered by endless accusations and calls for investigation from the right. The media may desire to hype a rematch, but it must be rejected by the voters. No to Kirsten Gillibrand, Cory Booker or any other candidate that comes off as an overly ambitious opportunist.
2
My criteria include: someone under 65 who is not afraid to learn. And, as an indicator of mental health and good self esteem, a sense of humor.
Geez when I saw this column with the headline, I said there he goes again, using hyperbole, comparing our current situation with the Civil War, which would be totally wrong, ie the reds have not succeeded from the blues and a full scale shooting war has not happened.
The last six paragraphs of your column were very Lincolnesque and MLKesque.
It is exactly what we have to do now.
It was well written.
2
The Democrats are their worst enemy. If you eliminate the man and focus on his policies, Trump is far less toxic than his poll numbers. In fact, tax cuts, strong military, jobs are the life blood of politics. In the past election, Democrats and the Press spent their hopes on diversity, race - religious, and gender, tax the wealthy to create to benefits for the bottom 15% of the population and identity politics. After having actually won many races, the Press and Progressives act deflated because ultra left candidates in the White Obama (Beto), Stacy Abrams and Gillum didnt win. Like 2016, this is an election Democrat can't lose unless they put up another unelectable candidate. HRC is looking mighty good in comparisons to the Bernie/Kamala/Elizabeth crowd- (BTW - she is unelectable)
1
The opposite of trump is the calm, focused, reasonable, well spoken and highly intelligent senator from Minnesota, Amy Klobuchar.
111
@ken Jacobs
John Brown was the answer to Trump. Amy pales by contrast to Trump's last female opponent. She be way too calm and cool to matter and master the bombast of the buffoon from Trump Tower.
3
@ken jacobs
Agree. DJT gains energy from his opponent if his opponent engages with him on his terms and at his level. With her calm demeanor and groundedness, Amy Klobuchar gives DJT no opportunities on which to gain this advantage. And her sanity and humanity would be a much welcome contrast to the chaos and mean-spiritedness of DJT.
My only concern about her is whether she can inspire the energy and enthusiasm of voters.
Given that, how about Beto O'Rouke as VP?
9
@ken jacobs Our ticket should be Sherrod Brown & Amy Klobuchar (either Klobuchar-Brown or Brown-Klobuchar). Besides being progressives who know how to talk to moderates, they have proven they can carry the kinds of states which decide the Electoral College. I’ll be voting for the 2020 Democratic nominee, but I’m doubtful about candidates from Massachusetts, New York, California, Vermont, or New Jersey. As for candidates like O’Roarke, Gillum, or Abrams, they need to win a statewide office first.
11
Of all who may run, I don't care who gets the Democratic nomination to oppose Trump so long as she/he:
- has and treats others with dignity,
- has compassion for others,
- speaks truth,
- speaks civilly,
- speaks above Trump's 3rd grade intelligence level,
- has an attention span greater than Trump's romper room level, and
- lives in the real world.
On another point:
"Welcoming back prodigal partisans, those who have excused or forgiven or even cheered hatred, misogyny, racism and division, is easier said than done..." is a fool's errand. They are beyond redemption.
Proof?
They know Trump is a liar yet they trust him to work for them.
If they argue that he produced a Supreme Right-wing Court that satisfies their religious beliefs against abortion which they believe is murder, then how do they excuse Trump's endearment with tyrants who trade in murder?
And is the prohibition against killing the only Commandment they care about?
They certainly don't care about adultery, stealing, speaking falsehoods against others, coveting the wives and goods of others.
So if they can have selective Commandments, they are beyond redemption.
The best thing to do with them is limit the damage they are very capable of doing to our nation.
3
American needs to restore its faith in institutions. It needs to restore faith that political leaders have the welfare of citizens in mind, rather than an elaborate plan of self enrichment.
It also needs voters who are not so wrapped up in self delusion that they vote for a crook to avoid voting for someone they've been told is a crook; vote for a liar to avoid voting for someone they've been told is a liar; vote for a Wall Street promoter to avoid voting for someone they've been told is a Wall Street insider.
That leaves me assured we will have 8 years of an incompetent, lying bully in the White House, filled with self enriching cronies.
If we are to select an anti-Trump, he or she (and I bet on he, given the current state of our electorate and the shape of the electoral college) will need a clear message about how he can solve their problems - dying towns, low wages, high cost of medicine, transportation, housing, education - without the bald faced lies that Trump delivers. And without the demonization of scapegoats.
It's a tall order, and so far, none of the people who are psuedo-runnning against Trump have what it takes.
When Charles Blow speak, I listen. But I have to take a different tack. What is needed is precisely an idea of who can beat trump because there is no post-trump world until trump exits. That needs to happen at the voters' earliest convenience, and the strategy starts now.
But it isn't so much a matter of who the individual is, but the *kind* of individual who can win. I can think of one who can't: The one who it was said about, "She won’t let a little thing like two stunning defeats stand in the way of her claim to the White House." That's a very trumpian claim of entitlement to power. (Mark Penn, what a monumentally stupid thing to say.) That's exactly why she isn't the kind of candidate who can win. She's too easy to run against.
Think of it this way. Who would trump and his right wing *love* to run against? OK, don't nominate one of them. Here's an inconvenient, and on this blog, wildly unpopular truth: Democrats won't beat trump unless they run a white male. Before you start throwing labels at me, think for a moment about all the air that would take out of a right wing hate campaign. Think of the things that couldn't be said. That couldn't be implied, dog-whistled, suggested, wink-wink, or whispered. It's *a lot*.
I'll make this offer: If in January 2021, a person other than a white male democrat is inaugurated as president, I will donate $1 million to the Democratic National Committee. I believe there is that much at stake. Symbols can wait.
Stop wasting time with words. Get voters registered, get people engaged. Hold local town halls to understand the issues and make sure your representatives know what we want. This worked in NJ 11 and we’re spreading fast in energy and action. Words are beautiful but don’t waste time now - get Democrats registered - 2020 is also census time and we must get these gerrymandered districts back to true representation of districts and the people
Stay energized - the slog is long and hard - but the stakes are worth it. Voter registration. Student engagement. Teach why “holding your nose” for the imperfect candidate is more important than ever to stop Trump and his thugs.
1
As a registered democrat who always votes, I would prefer that Hilary Clinton NOT run again.
2
Maybe we’ll get it right this time. One ca only hope (and work towards it).
But please, Please, PLEASE no Hillary Clinton. Ever.
Progressives should spend some time talking about how they plan to pay for their health care promises. As things stand the medical and pharmaceutical industries have greeted the last two decades of well meaning health care initiatives by going on a binge. Their feeding frenzy will not be slaked by liberals wagging their fingers at them. Forget the Santa Claus impersonations. I wanna see some serious "teeth and claws" from the left.
1
Out here in the bay area, people are starting to talk about Eric Swalwell (was on Bill Maher's show Fri night) as a contender to pay attention to. If you read his wikipedia profile, he has been laying the foundation for 2020.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Swalwell
I won't say that he has my vote yet, but the last time I got excited at this early stage, it was for a man that seemed to come out of nowhere with a "yes we can" message. Feels VERY good to be excited again by someone who appears to be in politics for the right reasons.
1
The best shot for "Reconstruction" -- in the least pejorative sense of that word -- is Michelle Robinson Obama running for our presidency in 2020. Her brilliant biography, "Becoming", is proof that she could restore The United States of America to the American Dream that it was for people all over the world in the past three centuries until this dystopian time of Trump.
Our 45th president has been running raucous re-election rallies since the day he took office. We have witnessed Trump's frightening grasp of power, his ignorance, his colossal lies and his admiration of autocratic "strongmen". Only if Trump is unseated in 2020 -- or before, if unforeseen events hold sway -- will we be back on the road to recovery under an educated and worthy president.
31
@Nan Socolow. My affection and admiration for her are so great that I would not wish this on her and her family. Besides, why do we constantly fall back on family connections and name recognition? Very few had heard of Obama or Sanders when they began their presidential runs.
7
@arp,
That Michelle is "family" and has name recognition shouldn't be held against her; she would, indeed, be a wonderful president and just right for the times. But, like you, I think she's given enough to this country and should be able to freely enjoy the rest of her life. And one simple fact prohibits our entertainment of her as a president: She's plainly stated she doesn't want the job. Unlike a lot of politicians who say the same thing and then are "somehow" persuaded, I believe she actually means it.
10
@woodswoman
Not wanting the job is a feature, not a defect.
"It is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."
-Douglas Adams
4
We do "need someone who can lead a post-Trump reconstruction of civil society in which those who are willing can walk away from Trumpism and back into a more normal political reality."
Now, "[w]elcoming back ... those who have ... even cheered hatred, misogyny, racism and division" is a fairly breathtaking proposition, especially when set forth in this column. But knowing how seriously you view that sin, I understand "welcoming back" to mean countenancing the return of such people as opposed to angrily repelling them; forgiving individuals and restoring society as opposed to settling in for endless internecine conflict.
The essential words come in the preceding paragraph: "those who are willing can walk away from Trumpism...." The emphasis is on the will of the sinner (just sustaining a metaphor, here) to reject the influence of Donald Trump. The prodigal partisan's way back into "a more normal political reality" should not be barred by Democratic gatekeepers.
It will come as a surprise if many of those who absolutely cheered hatred, misogyny, racism and division do choose to walk away, but the larger category of Trump voters is another matter. You and I just have to let it remain one of the great unsolved mysteries how decent, intelligent people could ever have swallowed such a camel as Donald Trump.
And if some who once cheered evil now decide to do more than give it a rest, if they wake up and repent, then let's literally welcome them back -- fatted calf and all.
Mr Blow,
The presidency is not the entire government. Congress should be more important.
1
Trump will be re-elected. He is following through on all of his campaign promises. I don’t recall a president in my lifetime who did that. He wants illegal immigration stopped, one of the main reasons he was elected, and he is working on that issue.
3
I can declare unequivocally at this moment: if the Democratic Party is so incredibly obtuse as to select Hillary Clinton as its candidate for the presidency in 2020, although I will never ever vote for a Republican again in my lifetime, neither will I vote for any Democratic candidate on the 2020 ballot.
My vote matters no more then any other vote, but I swear if Hillary Clinton heads the ticket in the next presidential election, she will lose and her party will richly deserve the loss. Moreover she will take a rich swath of down-ballot candidates with her.
Will the Democratic Party never learn?
88
@John lebaron
Well spoken. My state isn't relevant in presidential elections. A Democratic president hasn't carried Utah since LBJ. However, I can always tell when Democrats are going to lose nationally. If I'm even considering third-party or single-issue candidates in Utah, Democrats are doomed. Clinton is one of those candidates.
1
@John lebaron, so you would cut off your nose to spite your face? Can you really assert that Hillary Clinton would be worse than Trump? If not, then you should be one of those "hold-your-nose" voters. And why would you allow your dislike of Clinton to take your votes away from the other Democratic candidates on your ballot? What did they do?
3
I couldn't disagree with you more. Should Hillary Clinton seek the nomination and successfully convince the majority of Democrats that she is their best candidate then she will have my vote. No question.
4
The denigration of our political system shifted into super-gear with Citizens United. The centerpiece of your column, correctly pointing out the massive amounts of money Trump has already raised, reveals not a symptom but a cause. It's now all about money, so that the unfortunate reality that the Dems have to front someone who has major donors. How sad.
2
In a race to the bottom, it would be a huge mistake to think that anyone could ‘out-Trump’ President Trump. Every time you think that he has hit absolute bottom, he plumbs new depths. Instead, the Democrats need to select a leader who can inspire and unite.
In order to win, Democrats must forge a compelling narrative. The US is in real danger of falling apart. It does not have the same infrastructure of long history and shared national identity that other countries have. We are not China with 5000 years of a distinct culture. The US was founded with a story about the future not the past. And the current debate is about this story. Trump is selling an alternative narrative of nostalgia which has turned out to be surprisingly powerful. Unless the Dems own the future, he - oor someone like him - will win again. And the future lies with science and technology. Badmouthing tech companies, waxing nostalgic about failed socialism, or peddling unrealizable promises of every high-school dropout having the same job as his daddy won’t cut it. As flawed as Obama was, his rhetoric of hope and change resonated with people. Find somebody who can speak like him and lead the county forward.
That's quite a diverse list of people seeking to unseat our current President, however, you could add my dog to the list and, if nominated, I would vote for said dog. I intend to give as much time, energy and intelligence to my pick for President as the Trump loyalists give to their choices, none. I will ignore any and all attempts to debate, reason or cajole me into changing my mind or my vote. I will vote for the democrat, be it for dog catcher or dog President. We've already proven that America can run without the top position being filled with a competent, feeling, or even sentient, human being so I say we think outside the box and stop thinking altogether, like the Republican party. Then when your Republican friends come to you in a panic, with their jaws dragging the floor, unable to conceive how we could vote for such an ill equipped, unsuitable candidate to fill such an important role, I will assure them that, at least, Sparky is gentle, friendly , loyal, gets along with everyone and isn't rabid. More then we can say for the current occupant. "Sparky 2020" because every dog and every Democrat will have their day.
3
The New York Times just had a well written, long discussion on the rise of China. What we now need is a discussion of how we need to change in order to compete.
Part of answer is repeal of Cotizens United.
1
I completely agree with Mr. Blow - I'm an independent who strongly opposes Donald Trump, and I want the Democrats to step forward as an alternative to him rather than a liberal version of our current dysfunction.
1
What America really needs (and this is even more important than who Trump's successor might be) is to finally wake up from its dangerously uninformed sleepwalking assumption that our country is or should be some kind of celebrity-ocracy, with a reality TV start president-king giving us hope, change, healing, restoration, and a ton of other such wearisome and largely useless buzzwords, while trying to rule by executive order, while the rest of the political system continues to rot under a suffocating and increasingly dysfunctional two-party duopoly.
We urgently need to finally pay attention to our own Constitution, and our own history, and finally rein in the out-of-control growth of presidential power, restore a proper balance between the branches of the federal government, and reform our disastrous laughingstock Congress to some less unacceptable degree of decrepitude. We need a strong, broad-based legislative push on a non-partisan reform package of de-gerrymandering, ranked-choice voting, and a standardized, functional, paper-based, hand-counted national voting system like other democracies have had for centuries. And a constitutional amendment to undo the absurd horror of Citizens United.
While it may be a comforting fiction for progressives (and I'm one of them) to believe that Presidential Politics in America is about ideas and merit, it's not.
Presidential Politics is about identity, plain and simple. Trump is the prime example - he appealed to a particular group of aggrieved voters (of all social strata) who identified with his racism, misogyny, xenophobia and meanness. They weren't a majority of the voting populace, but they were numerous enough in three states to tip the scales of the electoral college.
So any candidate that can beat Trump has to be relatable, charismatic, forward-looking and just downright likable enough to a majority of the populace - it's about who the voters like best, not about who has the best policies or ideas. This explains how Obama won, twice. Compared to his presidential competitors, he was way more likable to a majority of the populace. This explains how Hilary lost - enormously well-qualified, and disliked by a big percentage of the populace.
If we fail to vet the many worthy progressive candidates through the lens of identity, the 2020 Presidential Election be another example of Democrats and progressives bringing a wet noodle to a gunfight. Could we please not make that mistake again?
1
@NorCalPatriot: Name recognition alone is the largest single component to getting elected to anything.
“We are in the middle of nothing short of an ideological civil war in this country. ”
No, we’re not.
1. Anyone who has seen armed conflict, even from afar, could tell you the millions of differences between a country with a war being fought in it and a country at peace.
2. Hidden tribes report. It turns out that something like 70% of us are not interested in the war, not fighting it, and stand ready to do things like compromise and make actual effective policy once all the hyperventilators run out of breath. I, for one, can’t wait.
21
@Chris Haskett
We are in actual hot war in at least 5 countries, yet over 90% of the people are not affected, not interested, and most are not even aware. That doesn't make it not true.
7
@Chris Haskett Mr. Blow specified an ideological civil war, not a shooting war. As to point #2, I am not sure to whom your term "hyperventilators" applies. In terms of Democrats, there are political activists (I am one) who are out front calling attention to our will to make health care affordable and accessible cradle to grave, to make sure every child can attend a good-quality public school no matter what their zip code, to do what ever is required, even to the point of federal mandate, to make it easy for every citizen to vote, and to have all the votes on all the ballots counted accurately, to restore the US to leadership in the area of human rights both at home and abroad, to address global climate change with sustainable solutions that can also provide jobs, and a host of other initiatives. We are active in asserting that each branch of government is subject to the law and are co-equal. We want an immigration reform effort to be both compassionate and reasonable, and we want to preserve 14th amendment rights. And we are working to both call attention to and end our country's centuries of systemic racism. Is that hyperventilating? Or were you talking about the rants about the "caravan" or criticisms of the SEAL take-out of Bin Laden or claims (unproven) of rampant voter fraud or various criticisms concerning insufficient raking in forests?
Both standing ready and then doing the work at the local level is what is required.
3
Two thoughts: 1. work on changing voting in key states.We just saw in GA how an election can be stolen - right before our eyes! Make registration mandatory at age 18 or you can't get a driver's license that is usable across the country. Always err to allow voting rather than what the GOP does by stripping voter roles if you have not voted in a couple of years. They know that maintains the tyranny of the minority. 2. Look for new faces to lead the charge for voter rights, universal health care, women's health care, jobs & infrastructure. Dump can be beaten with a message about the future. That dotard is all about the 1950's. Minorities and most women know that was a bad time for them. Young people have no nostalgia for that age.
@Pat: 3 million votes were discarded by a stupid relic of slavery to "elect" Trump. This makes an utter farce of the notion of mandatory voting.
@Steve Bolger Well if more people voted and the GOP were prohibited from actively delisting voters than the Electoral College (still an anachronism) would favor the GOP less. And, while we're on the Electoral College why do the Dakotas have 4 Senators and California just 2??
Knowing what followed in the wake of the first Reconstruction aka Jim Crow and the second Reconstruction aka Civil Rights era aka the New Jim Crow any hint of looking forward to reconstruction displays a stunning ignorance of the past and the present. There is this hopeless look forward without any historical context or perspective on how to make things better.
Among the Akan people there is the concept of Sankofa aka to see and make the future look back to the past and fetch or bring it forward. Symbolized by a Lightning Bird looking backwards with an egg on it's back.
Politicians are not going to lead nor save us from a dire future. Mahatma Gandhi once defined leadership as the ability to see where the people were going and running out in front of them.
What has not worked in the past is a warning about the future. While what worked in the past is not a guarantee for future success. What is needed is creative, independent and original thinking and thinkers.
What we do know is that Benjamin Netanyahu and Vladimir Putin will be back malignly hacking and meddling in favor of Trump Redux 2020. Coupled with the antics of the son of Confederate Alabama Addison Mitchell McConnell, Jr. wily trying to reverse the outcomes of the Civil War, Reconstruction and the Civil Rights eras.
Trump won once without any experience against an experienced seasoned politician. Will 2020 be a change or status quo election?
1
The president must stay in office. He needs to construct a defense that a sitting president cannot be prosecuted. Judge Kavanaugh will be happy to assist. But the moment the president becomes a private citizen, the witch hunts will become real and the floodgates will open.
Who should the Democrats run? Someone with charisma who's good on TV. That's all that matters. Would you curl up on the sofa and watch the Elizabeth Warren Show?
Charles,
Please describe in detail the opposite off Trump. In addition, address the differences in Chinese 21st century mercantile economics and American 21st century neo-classical economics, with some attention to national optimism. In addition, consider that Bill Gates and many others believe our current level of applied science has pushed the world's production possibility curves sufficiently outward - so that global poverty can be eliminated in the next 10 years, while also avoiding planetary destruction. One of the major obstacles in implementation is politics - will campaign donors fight to increase their relative wealth holding positions at the expense of America and the world? A small part of the answer is looking beyond tax cuts to meaning, to what really changes behavior and to what stimulates innovation on a societal scale. I know you know this. Write about it.
Hillary? NO. NO. NO.
Trump? He will use whatever money he has raised for 2020 for himself if he doesn't run. Not allowed? He doesn't care. Where did all the unused funds from the inauguration go?
Otherwise, can't we the people just please have a few months off from campaigning?
So, Trump has raised $102 million. When will commentators realize it's not about the money. They make it sound like he's a shoe in because his has a bigger purse. American voters are smarter than that. The ability to repeat, over and over again, a commercial will not ensure election. In fact, it may have exactly the opposite effect.
I think Trump will get reelected. Looking at the photo on this article reminds me that there is a sizable portion of the population who are clueless.
2
If Democrats nominate a progressive candidate then all is lost. This is political suicide. There is no progressive majority in America & never will be. The numbers are simply not there. And there certainly is no progressive Electoral College coalition in America that could get to the needed 270 votes. This point can't be emphasized enough: almost every progressive candidate in whom Democrats invested tremendous time, money, & emotional energy—Beto O’Rourke in Texas, Andrew Gillum in Florida, Stacey Abrams in Georgia— lost. Almost every significant progressive initiative on the ballot in this country was voted down. What progressives & their co-dependents will never understand is that far left mobilizes it's opponents to an even greater degree. Anti-left” will always beat “anti-Trump” in most places in this country but especially in swing states like Ohio & Florida. A lot of pundits misread the midterms claiming the Democratic party's the center of gravity has shifted. But to may voters Progressivism means trigger warnings, vile college protests & obnoxious academics who posture as their will on earth. They hate these people to their very core. Why shouldn't they? The far left has been mocking them for decades. You are bad for eating factory-farmed meat, owning a rifle, & driving an SUV. You are bad for speaking the language of micro-aggressions, patriarchy & cultural appropriation. There's no way to bridge this gap. Our best chance for victory in 2020 is to run a moderate.
27
It is nonsense to say that almost every progressive candidate lost. Indeed the opposite is true across the House. One could almost argue the opposite citing the same facts. An African American progressive in Florida came within a hairs breadth of winning. And an African American woman in Georgia (Georgia!!) almost overcame a massive voter suppression campaign in an election overseen by her opponent.
I have lived in Florida for 26 years and never seen the progressive energy generated by this election. A couple of thousand votes and we would have won. We did pass an amendment restoring the franchise to more than a million people.
I think that rejecting that energy and returning to the past will be rightly seen as a rejection of the coalitions that built that energy.
27
Progressive ballot initiatives passed by wide margins all across the country. Progressive politicians made a huge splash on the seen, following on the heels of Bernie's improbable insurgency in 2016, taking out incumbents in places where democrats haven't competed for decades. Almost no voters associate progressive policies with the Infowars bogeymen cited above. 2/3 of the American electorate are under 40 now and they rarely show up to make their voices heard in primary elections. They trend far more progressive and diverse than older voters. "Moderate" democrats should take back the GOP from the far right anarchists who took it over.
8
@Bill Brown
The “progressive” candidates you mention - Beto O’Rourke in Texas, Andrew Gillum in Florida, Stacey Abrams in Georgia – all lost in very close races. In other words, roughly 50% of voters voted for them. Those are numbers that ARE there. You seem willing to ignore half of the voters in those contests.
Read other comments here which are suggesting common-sense progressive initiatives – healthcare, infrastructure, fair election policies, etc. These are hardly extremist policies. Are you saying the voters would reject FDR today? Moderation got us into the mess we’re in. And it will keep us there if we embrace it. You think the Republicans are running on moderation? They will laugh all the way to victory.
14
Imagine a newly re-elected Trump. Freed from the burden of having to run for the highest office in the land a third time, what do you imagine he would do with all of his free time? I am sure he would start by settling scores with enemies--real and perceived. Hillary's emails will get a third look. The Obama obliteration campaign will shift into high gear. Finding new ways to get around the emoluments clause will be a focus. And a pathway to allow Don Jr. a way to serve as president---even from jail---will take priority. The latter will be necessary because a constitutional amendment to serve a third (or unlimited) term will take longer than 4 years. Think of what an unfettered Trump could do to this country and vote accordingly.
Trump’s supporters remain with him. They are irredeemable.
The question is what will the 50% of eligible voters that stayed home in 2016 saying there was no difference between Trump and Clinton do?
Trump will either be re-elected or crushed in defeat.
2
Trump's usefulness to the Republican Donor class is now fully exhausted. As the midterm data has come in, there's sudden activity by establishment Reps to swap Trump out -- how else to explain the sudden appearance of the #ChecksAndBalances crowd?
We nitwits have left the station, Charles. We are not interested in being "welcomed back" by socialists (whatever that may mean). I hope we can have a civil discourse so that we can stop calling each other names. Then we 'deplorables' may have an opportunity to convince you lefties that a mix of nationalism and a social safety net will help our country keep the Constitution strong for those who have earned the right to be legal citizens. Trump is not the best person to lead us to that goal, but he'll do for the moment. The left has nothing to offer but weakness and the Balkanization of our country. In 2024 the truth will be evident and we will be on the road to reconstruction.
1
Hillary won by almost 3 million votes. Add that that, Trump’s 3 million “illegal” votes and she won by 6,000,000 votes! (Illegal and Trump go together so well.)
I voted for her and I really hope she doesn’t run again.
"Welcoming back prodigal partisans, those who have excused or forgiven or even cheered hatred, misogyny, racism and division, is easier said than done..."
You bet it is. And you cannot put the onus on the next (rational) president we elect when the "hate industry" of talk radio and Fox "News" will go hyperactive in response to restoration of sanity to our political system.
Meanwhile, my candidates from your list include Mr. Bloomberg who has a great opinion piece in today's paper and Mitch Landrieu of Louisiana. I hope they both run.
15
@Alfred Yul I agree with your choices and want to add another name to the list----Sherrod Brown. He has proven appeal to ordinary folks, and yet is smart and appealing. He has the right message for our times--- the dignity of work, and the need to rein in corporate behemoths. He is truly "authentic", unlike Trump who is all show and no substance. Also, he will run his own campaign and not fall into the trap of being reactive to Trump, who of course will coin a nickname for him and try to get under his skin.
9
@Alfred Yul, I had a dream that Fox went off the air -- the atmosphere was blissful.
5
I dont care what anyone says, a moderate Democrat from Colorado is the way to go. The American people need a unifier, and that unifier cant be a progressive firebrand. That will just push the many Independents (we still exist, I voted for all Democrats and 1 Republican this cycle, but I'm not a partisan) into Trumps arms.
I think Hickenlooper should run. I've been happy with how Colorado has been run, and he unifies Republicans and Democrats to get things done.
I just hope he doesnt get booted out because the Democrats are looking for a woman or a POC. He would be a good president and shouldn't be discounted because he is a white man. I've heard that criticism several times, and I think it comes up because his policy positions are actually very popular and so it's easier to attack him on identity issues.
42
@Jacqueline I caught an interview with him a while back. Seems like a decent human being who would make a good president.
1
@Jacqueline
The perfect vessel for the Democratic message is Sherrod Brown of Ohio. He ticks all the boxes, PLUS... to the TV Generation (who elected Trump), he’ll subliminally remind them of lovable, rumpled Det. Columbo. What better foil for a crook like Trump?
8
@Jacqueline
I have nothing against Hickenlooper. He is little conservative for my tastes but surprisingly flexible depending on the issue. As I've pointed out elsewhere though, Hickenlooper is an extreme long shot for the White House and the odds have nothing to do with his politics. This is going to sound strange but hear me out.
Hickenlooper is unlikely to become president because his last name is linguistically disadvantaged. Others have already pointed out Obama's difficulty with names. However, I'm talking about the actual sound of Hickenloopers name, not his supposed foreignness.
Consider this: Only one candidate in all of US history has won the presidency with a last name over three syllables. That one President was Dwight D. Eisenhower. You might recognize why Eisenhower suffered no name disadvantage among the voting public. Hickenlooper hasn't won any global wars, has he? Otherwise, his candidacy is a long shot.
3
The only candidate that I find capable of inspiring and mobilizing is Beto. Let's hope he jumps in.
1
America will face the same problems every election unless we fix the underlying systemic problems in our Democracy - gerrymandering, the hyper-focus on battleground states, blatant falsehoods, disorganized registration and voting, opaque campaign financing, the politicization of judicial appointments. These problems make our system less representative of the people's interests and reduce fair competition between politicians, ultimately resulting in less competent governance. There are sensible solutions to all of these problems, some of which are already in place in certain states - non-partisan redistricting, split electors, ranked-choice voting.
Unfortunately, there are many individuals who benefit from the status quo. A congressman in a safe district will do whatever is in his power to preserve partisan gerrymandering. The only way this can be overcome is for the vast majority of the populace to place more value on our democratic system than they do on the more visceral issues - abortion, guns, immigration, and so on. Despite our willingness to go to war for the cause of democracy, we seem to be unwilling to lift democracy to it's rightful place in domestic politics.
Charles,
Please describe in detail the opposite off Trump. In addition, we should address the differences in Chinese 21st century mercantile economics and American 21st century neo-classical economics, with some attention to national optimism. In addition, consider that Bill Gates and many others believe our level of applied science has pushed the world's production possibility curves outward - so that global poverty can be eliminated in the next 10 years, while also avoiding planetary destruction. One of the major obstacles is politics - will campaign donors fight to increase their relative wealth holding positions at the expense of America and the world? A small part of the answer is looking beyond tax cuts to meaning, what really changes behavior and what stimulates innovation on a societal scale. I know you know this. Write about it.
1
My theory is that most Americans are hungry for adult leadership.
I’d like to see a candidate who has the quick wit, communication skills and intestinal fortitude to stand up to Donald Trump but who also campaigns on ideas and has the vision to show how his/her ideas will lead to a better future.
He or she should have experience in an executive role and a record of creativity, competence and achievement in that role. A record of Personal integrity is a must.
She/he should have the gift of reaching out beyond her/his natural base and speaking to them without demeaning them. This is essential. I’d like to see someone from a rural state where both Democrats and Republicans are competitive and leaders are forced to compete.
Ideologically speaking, I’d like to see someone who puts the needs of Americans who work for a living first and foremost and who builds his/her policies addressing our problems: inequality, healthcare, education and climate change around creating a better world for us—not the 1%. I’m not saying that social issues are not important but they should not be the focus of the campaign.
Finally, a message to the DNC. Let’s play it straight this time. No “it’s her turn” no debates at times when no one will be watching. No putting an official thumb on the scales. Let the candidates have at it and let the best woman or man win—even
if he/she is not the person favored by insiders.
The survival of our nation could depend on getting this right.
9
@Brooklyncowgirl
Bravo!
Although the goal of a campaign in addition to winning is to spend all of the money, what are the Rules on donations from Super PACs?
It was reported that Christie was able to cover legal fees with those donations during the Bridge-gate scandal after his failed bid for president.
What happens if Trump decides he'd rather just take the money and NOT run.
1
This time, Reconstruction needs to be done right, ensuring the full enjoyment of all human rights by all people. That must be the bottom line. No compromise; no half measures.
5
We need an anti-Trump president and an anti-GOP Congress in order to do the things that must be done to correct things. Pack all the courts, RICO the Trump family organization, and redo the tax code. Increase the House so the same proportion of people are in each CD as there were when the freeze was made. Establish a voter commission to draw ALL Congressional districts and establish uniform voting rules forall Federal elections.
THEN we can talk about reconciliation.
To allow the Trump-era to retain its ill-gotten gains is no reconciliation.
16
Bravo! Well put, I hope this happens. I live in Texas, and trust me, the ambivalence about Trump is significant. However, Texan's aversion to the far left will "Trump" their ambivalence every time if the Dem's float an Elizabeth Warren type of candidate.
The Democrats are the only adults in the room nowadays, they have a responsibility to try and bridge the divide. Let's not forget that we likely have Trump today because the Democrats got out too far ahead of the country on social issues.
Sadly, I think the Dem's have to float a white male candidate if they want a good shot at winning. I know our country deserves a more diverse President, but that can only happen if they derail the Trump Train first.
15
@Sam Wrong. I live in Cedar Park Texas, and I am one of millions who moved there from California. We want REAL progressive change. Why? Because it would be great for our new neighbors, who suffer from horrifically high maternal mortality rates and lack of access to basic health care. We need an Elizabeth Warren president or very little will change for the poor and working classes. Then the GOP will run on the myth of "scary brown people" and win. Again.
2
I couldn't agree more. The 2020 elections are more about rescuing the Republic than about victory for party or ideology. We took an important step in 2018, restoring the U.S. House of Representatives to its proper place of independence from the executive branch. In 2020 we need to end Trump's assault on our democracy by ousting him from the White House, and it's important that we replace him with someone who values democratic norms and the rule of law.
Policy issues are important, but even more important than advancing Democrats' policy preferences is preserving democracy.
politicsbyeccehomo.wordpress.com
2
The people living in red states need to take back control of their states from the entrenched gerrymandered legislators who block every progressive piece of legislation that benefit the people as opposed to the 1%. This election voters in at least three deep red states used voter initiatives to expand Medicaid coverage through the ACA and raised the minimum wage in their states. The voters had to do this themselves because their corrupt legislators refused to do what was good for the people of their state. Voters should also use voter initiatives to end gerrymandering and to ensure the voting rights of all Americans.
5
Charles, my wish for you this week of Thanksgiving is that you find ways to reconstruct yourself, as well.
We don't need a more liberal Trump, but we do need a more non-hyper-progressive Blow.
My best wishes for your restoration, and, yes, I am working on my own.
2
We are going to need something like a Truth and Reconciliation Commission when Trump finally leaves. There has to be an attempt made by an impartial body (however we can agree on that) to set the record straight. Perhaps the combination of Chief Justice Roberts and Presidents Obama and Bush could be honorary chairpersons.
Such a scenario could likely could only happen after strong legal cases against all those who are miscreant, and would focus instead on the lesser offenders, promising reconciliation IF they tell the truth. It still would likely take years, but might clear the air. Otherwise we are just likely to repeat this tragedy.
3
@Ed Schwartzreich Really? Three MEN need to head up this committee after women have been forced to watch a sexual predator elected to the White House - who then nominated a sexual predator to the Supreme Court? Men have a LOT of apologizing and reparing to do when it comes to women. And I am NOT just referring to Right Wing men.
1
@Penny White Please name your three persons who would qualify. I would be happy with any trio that did not cause a large segment of our population to run into the streets screaming. We are so divided now; perhaps you can do better.
Here in Ohio, just around 50% of registered voters went to the polls in the midterms. Ohio went totally Red except for Sherrod Brown. Ohio is the poster state for the results of voter suppression. We too had a candidate for Lieutenant Governor running his own election as Secretary of State. We too had unbelievable amounts of outside money coming in to elect Dewine and Husted. Most political pundits and experts now consider Ohio a fully Republican state. The Democratic Party in this state has NO PLAN for any of the above issues or problems. Voter registration and suppression--not to mention fielding attractive and eligible candidates up and down the ballot--have to be dealt with here before we start talking 2020 candidates.
7
Actually, it's a Second Civil War, Charles. Except this time we have the Constitutional nullifiers in the Oval Office and still in control of the Senate. With constant attacks on the 1st amendment's guarantee of "freedom of the press" leading to the death of an American journalist and resident followed by the attempt to removed access to The White House of a CNN reporter; the lack of enforcement of the Constitution's emoluments clause; the proposal to tear up the 14th amendment by revoking "birthright citizenship;" the usurpation of Congress's right to set tariffs; the appointment of an unqualified and unconfirmed crony to seize control of the Department of Justice, we have a modern-day Jefferson Davis in autocratic control of government complete with the ancient racism and total, solid South support. The nation and the moribund Democratic Party showed signs of renewed life, thanks to a diverse coalition of progressive young women, this November, but the major battle against the anti-Constitutional autocrats has just begun. Hopefully, there will be Reconstruction rather than further destruction of our democracy in 2020, but it may take a 21st century Abraham Lincoln to save the Union.
10
Dear Mr. Blow,
What reconstruction do you have in mind, relative to your title “the route to reconstruction”?
Would that include the restoration of integrity in political discourse (as in ’the use of factual information’)?
This is somewhat implausible for me, if I read (quoting from the July report in the Washington Post): “More than two dozen people are in the process of exploring campaigns to take out President Trump, but only a handful have the relationships with wealthy donors, significant personal wealth or small-dollar fund-raising apparatus to raise the early money needed to mount a traditional campaign”.
Money. Money. Money. I see a selection system in play in which the ability to raise money is the defining criterion for success. For enterprises and charitable causes this should work nicely. For the selection of candidates for the position of President of the United States this approach is very unsuitable and risky.
Let’s go for a reconstruction of the integrity of the selection process first. This means getting money out of politics, as much as possible. Sure, this won’t happen overnight, as campaign finance laws would have to be completely overhauled, including the rules pertaining to these phoney (Super)PACS. And you can count on moneyed interests - and the politicians beholden to them - to frustrate efforts to re-write these rules, but it has to happen if some semblance of democracy is to be restored.
9
Democrats need to focus on three things now: (1) registering more voters — including newly enfranchised Floridian ex-felons; (2) making it easier to vote and ending voter suppression and gerrymandering; (3) advocating new ethics laws in Congress and the states to begin the process of making sure crooked regimes like Trump’s can never again use the presidency as a cash register; and (4) setting up a 50 state infrastructure ready to go in 2020.
Let the politicking itself wait a bit.
25
I think the picture says a lot. Without intending to generalize about my non east coast neighbors, I have a question about those t shirts
Make 45 46 again.
Unsound logic.
Read the others and you may come to the same conclusion.
There’s no time machine. America is not the same demographic country as it was 50 years ago.
Hasn’t the time come to look forward and not into the past?
9
@Steve Ell I saw that too. I guess the idea was he wanted 45 to be re-elected, but if that happens (shudder), he'll still be 45. 46 would refer to the next person who becomes President. I wonder that no one pointed that out to him? Or maybe he is saying 45 should step aside (yay!) to allow 46 on stage?
4
@Steve Ell
I'm sure many others are thinking the same thing when they look at the photo :-) Trump can't be 46 AGAIN, because he has never been, and can never be the 46th president. The numbering is based on how many individual people have been POTUS, not on the term being served (which still wouldn't make the shirt make sense if it was!).
It would make more sense for the shirt to say, "Make 46, 45 again", as in, instead of electing a new person as president, reelect the current one.
@Steve Ell
All I see are a bunch of people who have no idea what America is about. It's finally sunk into my brain that we've become a silly country full of people who aren't terribly bright.
I see billionaires running this country going forward, so I'm looking to Michael Bloomberg. He won't need to court wealthy donors. He's a little quirky and can't seem to decide whether he's Republican, Democratic, or Independent (hey, maybe that's a good thing,) but right now he's firmly on the side of Democrats and has contributed to Democratic campaigns exclusively. Also, he's really into dealing with this climate change issue.
If not him, then Tom Steyer.
That's about it. We're now a country of the billionaires, by the billionaires, for the billionaires, so why waste a lot of time thinking about it? Pick one and go with it.
1
In a recent article in the Times, the author said Hillary still wants to be POTUS. In case anyone missed that story, equal to that stunning announcement, were the equally stunning "thumbs-down" comments from the readers. NO ONE WANTS HRC TO RUN AGAIN, except for the campaign consultants.
We, the Democratic Party will not take back the White House if we field ANY of the same candidates who lost to Trump. The right-wing media gasbags have been after HRC for more than 30 years which makes her a soft target for the fear-mongering, conspiracy theorists holed up on the internet, as well as Fox.
With a bit of luck thrown into the mix, TeamMueller may be the key to a Democratic win for POTUS. Of course, Trump's fans will never believe a word of whatever comes from the Mueller investigation because their Orange Leader will tell them not to believe it.
SO we will have to rely on any remaining moderates in the right-of-center constituency to deny Trump, and Trumpism, another four disastrous years.
Reconstruction will mean restoring our relationships with our allies; restoration of integrity at the EPA, Interior and the rest of the cabinet posts; a restoration of public education; and, actually getting the infrastructure projects under way.
And, as China gets richer while Russia gets poorer, America needs leadership for education for all Americans. Poverty should not keep good students from higher education. Read the article on China's rise in the Times for details.
11
I have already decided who I will support -- Swalwell and Steyer -- not necessarily in that order -- but this would be my ideal team.
2
@Tom Cotner
I'm with you!!
Was startled to see your name come up as I am perusing the NYT this morning!!
Hope you are well.
Judy Williams Stephenson
@Judy Stephenson
Judy, what a beautiful surprise!!! So glad to see your comment -- I begin each day with the NYT -- which, IMHO is about the most reliable of the lot -- and since I'm about the only democrat left in Jackson county, it is a welcome tonic.
Enjoy a perfect Thanksgiving.
Tom
Since no one has come up with a formula for how to bring our country together this is my attempt:
In 2020 the Democrats should 100% unite around a guaranteed one term ticket of Biden/Kasich.
This ticket will easily defeat trump. This ticket will compromise and force the congress to compromise.
The Biden/Kasich administration can bring us back from the brink. Then in 2024 - who knows?
7
@A B Bernard
It's the right thing to do for the country but the Democrats will not nominate Biden and Kasich will never leave the Republican party to join Biden on the Democratic ticket.
The country needs a strong, moral and ideologically moderate person of good manners and good humor. Unfortunately, neither party is structured to bring us that person.
1
@Richard Winkler Hi Richard, I believe you are half right. Certainly the Republicans fail on each point you list. However, in terms of recent history, what about Barrack Obama? He certainly embodied each point of yours. I miss him every single day I watch CNN. And there are plenty of Democrats lining up to run who also have those characteristics, as Charles noted today.
7
Good Article Title.
It at last represents recognizing that Reconstruction ended in failure in the Confederate Slave States of the South, and that the deal struck to end it in the 1870s brought back into our politics some of the most brazenly immoral leaders of the Southern US.
Mr. Blow, please start writing about the Neo-Confederates that have infested our country with the same diseased ideology that they started a war to promote in 1861. Get the editors to focus on the end of Reconstruction and the evils that were allowed to grow again for a century, only to be cut down again by the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Point out how Lee Atwater was the principal architect of the 'Southern Strategy' that has resulted on our flawed political discourse that makes cutting taxes synonymous with re-segregation.
Our work was not finished in 1865, and has been under continuous assault since 1965. We need to bring sunshine to the real mores of the people who support Trump before we can establish a sensible strategy for a Democratic victory in 2020.
10
American politics is a pendulum. It swings left, then right, liberal then conservative, status quo then firebrand. Especially the president.
President Obama, "No Drama Obama", wouldn't take credit for anything, saving the economy; saving the auto industry; killing bin Laden or providing health care to over twenty million Americans. He was articulate and thoughtful, vs George W who (although we may remember him with a fuzzy warm nostalgia) didn't speak in full sentences. He and his family represented one of the most understated and decent families to ever occupy the White House. Oh, and he was black.
Enter Trump. He takes credit for everything and anything, whether he deserves credit or not, as long as it's positive. And he shirks responsibility for anything that's not working under his watch, and constantly plays one group of Americans off the other. He stands up for autocratic leaders all over the world, and tries to destroy democratic institutions. He is the definition of divisive.
I have faith in our representative democracy. I believe that the pendulum is still swinging and our next leaders, including the President, will be thoughtful, articulate and inclusive. We need a president who focuses on policy and on all Americans.
Since Trump will be the Republican candidate in 2020, I believe we will elect a Democrat who will do just that.
15
And, the SUN will shine down on us all benevolently bestowing wonderful benefits to everyone forever. Hah!
1
I ageee. Our democracy, our climate, our economy, our standing in the world cannot withstand without serious damage another four years of Trump. Adopting a strategy of promoting Identity politics and narrow, special interest concerns will not defeat him. More importantly, even if a Democrat were to win with such a strategy, the country would be more divided. A house divided cannot stand.
6
At the times when our democracy was at its greatest peril, giants emerged to pull us back from the brink. I'm thinking of Washington, Lincoln, and Franklin Roosevelt. I think we are fast approaching a fourth existential crisis. Will America's unique social/political churning again produce a political giant to pull us back from the brink?
If our luck holds, he/she will be a Democrat.
23
@Ralph Averill. He/she could be an independent. When I talk to people who reluctantly voted for Trump about who they could support against him the names which come up are Bernie Sanders and Mike Bloomberg. This is odd because they are pretty much at opposite ends of the liberal political spectrum in terms of policy.
Both are likely running in 2020.
YES!!! It would be a big mistake to nominate someone who tries to out-Trump Trump in nastiness, bullying, sleaze etc., etc. If the Dems do that the tone of our discourse and the tenor of the nation will never recover. It will become a given that going very low is how to win elections, period.
If Dems maintain the high ground in 2020 they may lose (or win). If they lose, Donald Trump is the only one being the mean, nasty, lying, SOB he has been all along. In 2024, the tone can truly be changed, i.e., the current tone can begin to wane once he is gone.
The other point is that no one can truly out-Trump the man because for him the bullying & nastiness and dicey relationship with the truth are natural. It is who he is. Anyone else trying to match him on that (anyone who is basically a more decent, open minded person with a real beating heart) would merely be a comical imitation of the master. In short, he would rip them to shreds with the very manner they sought to imitate. In the process, all of us who are horrified, dismayed, and furious at what he has made of our country, will have nowhere to go with our support.
Bad idea to go low, Democrats, stick to the high ground.
42
The first time I got to vote for President was the 1972 Nixon vs McGovern race and I remember well how I wanted a candidate much different from the traditional nominee like former Vice-President Hubert Humphrey who lost to Nixon in 1968.
McGovern was the liberal alternative and although our country was getting its first whiff of Watergate during the primary season, Nixon breezed to victory in 1972.
As Democrats sort through the directory of candidates looking to oust Trump, it would be good to look back at what went wrong with the convention and Fall election battle between George McGovern and Richard Nixon.
14
"Before we in our parlor games settle on who has the best shot of winning, let’s examine our lists for the candidates who represent our best hope for restoration."
We can't have restoration if we don't win. And, to (accurately) quote Leo Durocher, "The nice guys are all over there, in seventh place" (in those days the National League was one division of eight teams). Or, to quote Churchill: "Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival."
This is a war for America; make no mistake about it. If Trump wins again it may well be game over.
So, what we need is a plan. First, win in 2020, and that will require our full, and completely united, efforts. Then, plan for "restoration" starting in 2024.
15
Unfortunately, moral and decent Americans seek the best candidate for the next presidential election. The only question is which candidate will be the most likely to defeat Trump. The future of America depends on defeating our current President. It will not be easy. Gerrymandering, the electoral college and voter suppression create significant obstacles. I would not be surprised by the possibility of a candidate losing the election by 10 million or more votes and winning the electoral college. The mid-terms, however, offer some hope, and guidance. Minority candidates (black, latino, women, lgbtq) brought more voters to the polls. Anti-Trump sentiments also inspired many to vote who otherwise would have stayed home. Dem's need to pay heed.
9
@Disillusioned I share your basic message that we need to work hard and make it happen, but I am not sure I am so inclined to think it an impossible battle. This election cycle, we saw what happened when PA freed itself from the worst of gerrymandering. There are 9 reps for each party in PA, which is about what the split should be, rather than the old one sided result. Also, Wisconsin, PA, and Michigan leaned Democratic this time. And Texas - by gosh Beto almost put down Cruz there. Plus the ballet initiative to restore voting rights to felons who have served their time passed in Florida by a wide margin. Florida has been on a knife's edge for as long as I can remember. This frees up potentially 1.4 million votes that will probably trend Democratic. Plus several reversal of gerrymandering ballot initiatives passed. I think these are all positive signs. If we spend the next two years fighting for new voters, fighting to repeal gerrymandering, fighting to end voter suppression and encourage voter registration, we might be able to turn this around.
I doubt a Democrat can beat Mr Trump. My bet is that he is re elected. Ironically that might be good for democracy.
Honestly the imperial presidency has not and is not good for Democracy. We have vested the office with too much power and we look at the office holder as a messiah doing the work to save us.
Well it s not working now and hasn’t for a long time. What would be good for democracy is a high functioning Democratic Congress.
Dems took the House and they now must try to take the Senate. Let’s see Congress —the sleeping lion —waking up and interested doing its job!
Mr Trump’s election has done much for the country. Newspapers and news organizations that were barely alive are thriving. We are getting record numbers of voters to the polls. People are engaged. Now let’s see if for the sake of Democracy we can somehow build a working Congress. It’s up to us!
7
Please Hillary. Just go back to running your foundation. You had your change and America doesn't want to see you again!
28
On reading the diversity of estimations for a Presidency in the reader comments I wondered whether even a divine administration could fulfill what is awaited...and from just 58 comments.
Is it conceivable that a national referendum (state primaries) with grandstanding sermons and media-hype is little more than a "beauty contest"?
The voting public has become trapped in the now lingering myths of the American adventure with political economy. It is not that the portfolio is lacking of "rights" declarations. "We the people..." remains hallowed. Yet the circumstances of life in the 21st century from the 300 year experiment with free-wheeling pursuit of gain and self-styled political governance has come to pose multiple consequences.
For instance, in the settlement period deficiencies in nutrition from essential food shortages had life vulnerable. In the present period malnutrition stemming from excesses in food consumption has obesity ranked as a national health hazard. Similarly, mental health ailments have become the largest medical expense category.
The governance 'system' has in the course of time also had its perverse consequences. For instance, early-on the effort was to include individuals in the election process. Presently there are efforts to exclude certain individual from the process.
Economic 'system' confronts perverse consequences as well. Labor shortages once for meeting consumer basic needs, confront consumer excess consumption to avoid
labor surpluses.
3
When T won it was said going forward there will be a succession of celebrity presidents. This with the media and technology could be true. Of all on the list I really hope some unknown today with talent ability integrity and Davy will emerge.
2
Kennedy, Carter, Clinton, Obama. The 4 successful Democratic candidates since. Young men with vision and the message to inspire. I realize that 80 is the new 60 or whatever, but I do feel the Democrats need a new voice be it man, woman, Black, White, or Brown. I have nothing against Biden, Sanders, Warren, and others; their voices are necessary. But it's time to pass the mantle to a younger generation with a ticket that galvanizes the winning Obama coalition.
40
It's useful to remember at a juncture like this that in our
constitutional system, the president doesn't make the laws;
Congress does that. But a century of journalism has inflated the
importance of the executive out of all proportion to common sense.
This column is a continuation of that tradition. I suspect that
if you burrow deeply enough into the journalism community, you will
find that it's monarchistic at heart. Perhaps this is because
monarch/hero stories are more fun to tell than those narrating the
complex deliberations and trade-offs of real democracy.
11
@Charles Packer Well maybe, but Congress seems to have bought the argument lock, stock and barrel. Or else why has the entire Republican House and Senate rolled over like lap dogs and allowed Trump to befoul anything he felt like despoiling for the last two years with out any challenge at all, except for those retiring or John McCain who passed? Congress certainly seems to believe in the power of the Presidency. Except when Obama was President, then it was all NO all the time for the last 6 years. Maybe it's party rather than institution?
The DNC thought that super delegates would be the best for vetting candidates. It kept out Sanders. It didn't work out so well. On the Republican side, Trump was the favorite of the people, and the electoral college agreed. Let's simply hope that the DNC doesn't have anymore grand ideas.
5
@Anthony
The "favorite of the people" lost the popular vote...
Please. Use some basic logic and truth. No one is denying that Trump won the electoral college and the Presidency (basic facts). "Favorite of the people" is highly questionable now that the majority of those polled (in poll after poll) disapprove of the President.
1
You’re advocating a nominating process that produced Donald Trump?
Trump received 44% of the Republican primary vote — 14M total. This is less 12% of the votes cast in the general election in which he lost the popular vote after a campaign that appealed exclusively and overtly to white voters. In which universe does this make Donald Trump the “favorite of the people”?
@tom boyd There's also the pernicious invocation of the "will of the people." "The people" is inevitably a closed group -- the composition of this particular group being obvious. Anyone not part of the group is not one of "the people" and therefore has no legitimate political rights.
You don’t describe the opposite of a liberal Trump. Are you saying a racist with a heart?
The Democratic Party wins when we have charismatic candidates who inspire and articulate a positive message. We need another Barrack Obama, not an anti-Trump.
29
America does not need a Liberal Trump However not does it need a Democratic candidate who campaigns progressive and governs as a liberal Republican I include Obama in this category I wonder if he would have lost the House and Senate to the GOP had he not distanced Progressives once he got elected I remember Press Secretary Gibbs labeling Progressives the "professional Left" and Rahm Emmanuel calling them "f*****g retards" Not one banker did jail time under Obama and Holder for their crimes In fact Obama reassured bankers that e would not dismantle their industry in wake of the economic crises Over 90 % of the stimulus package that helped end the recession went to the 1% That is not a recipe for keeping the base enthused for the midterms
The GOP embraced the TParty which now forms the bulk of Trump's base The Democrats distanced Progressives and the energy built up by the Operation Wall Street movement which resulted in an enthusiasm gap for the midterms Obama was far more popular with Progressives than the policies of the Democratic Party Hillary did nothing to reverse this
The future of the Democratic Party lies in returning to it's roots as the party of the common man-FDR's party not the Clinton-Obama party In 21st century terms that includes universal healthcare livable wages a dismantling of trickle down economic tax policies and furthering human tolerance
Policies based on economic fairness and go far in muting the race based resentment that GOP fans and exploits
11
Re: "People’s interests, inclinations and sources of information"
It goes beyond that. Way beyond. There are people who don't merely differ or disagree but who have openly advocated for the disappearance of those that don't fit into their interpretation of the Bible by legislation or fiat. Then these people act as if those they want to harm or suppress are overreacting to their threatened elimination.
10
Although I am very progressive and would hope for the same in 2020, the reality is that the majority of commonsense people are in the middle. In the middle means that we may be progressive socially, but more conservative fiscally or more progressive fiscally. For the democrats to retake the White House the pragmatic thing to do is change, court the middle, minimize fraternization with Wall Street, and return to mainstreet.
18
Dish up the truth as stark and straight as it needs to be told about the wholly unsustainable path we have set upon, and that the restoration we truly need is ecological restoration on local and global scales ... well that candidate might be assured of about 5% of the vote.
Enter the technocrats assuring voters we can get by with plugging more renewable energy into the grid, allowing Americans to maintain their wholly unsustainable imperative for growth and wholly unsustainable standards of living, and you might have a "winner".
The American Fossil Way is set in amber. Democrats have no vision for the restoration the earth truly needs, no establishment of a base to save the earth. Democrats can shun their "extremists" just as well as Republicans as they talk the Democratic line of shallow environmentalism and walk the Republican line of living like there is no tomorrow.
"Houston Strong" is wearing thin. Just look at Paradise.
16
@Lou Nelms
Ideally we need a strong, third, independent party because both current parties have catered overwhelmingly to corporate power interests which ignore the majority of the people.
Yes tell the truth. Why is this so hard to do ? The truth is what Americans crave. Don’t be afraid of just saying what is true. Of course you must in this time support with evidence.
@Lou Nelms: At some point, growth becomes cancer.
If you want a better Federal Government than what we have had for most of the last 40 years you are going to have to decide that you want a better society than the one we have had for the last 40 years. Our private and institutional leadership is rife with corruption because we as a people have allowed it. Let the CEO's make obscene amounts of money, it allows those under them to make more money also. Let our politicians be all millionaires and billionaires, after all, isn't that how we judge success? Please explain to me why a modest home of 1600 sq ft was completely satisfactory for a family of 5 but is only a starter home fro a family of 2. 4 or 5 people now need 3400 sq ft or more to fell comfortable, while we have hundreds of thousands, or millions, of people with no home at all. We must acknowledge that it is just as important that everyone have an opportunity for a real education, a healthy lifestyle, and a sufficient income to provide for a family as it is for ourselves to have these things. Then, and only then, can we begin to rectify our unjust and immoral inequality of wealth distribution in this country that is the root of all of our social problems.
65
@Ed Clark: How we live is a product of our social problems. The more of us there are, the less each of us is worth to everyone else.
1
I actually look forward to the primary process, in the hopes that it will allow the voters - not the media, the pundits, the pollsters - to clearly communicate which kind of candidate we want. This list of hopefuls is long and diverse and I am cautiously optimistic that a well-liked, qualified candidate will emerge to defeat Trump.
In order for this to happen, we need the media to actually let this process play out. By this time last election cycle, this very newspaper was using terms like "the presumptive Democratic nominee" to describe Hillary Clinton. Before one vote was cast we were already told who to expect to win. No wonder her campaign seemed so blind to its problems reaching voters in places like Ohio and Michigan - the media had already informed her that she's won!
Too many people still talk about (often in angry terms) the Clinton / Sanders dynamic. I'm far more upset that so many other qualified Democrats chose not to run, having been informed by the media that it was a done deal, a year before the first primary vote was cast.
In the coming months, it will be tempting for the Times and other media outlets to declare a front runner based on polling, fundraising, trips to the Iowa State Fair, you name it. I beg of you - avoid the temptation and let the voters be heard.
54
@Solaris -
I completely agree with your point that the 2016 race, even during the primaries, was reduced as a fair d'accompli, to Clinton/Sanders. The number of Republican candidates vs the paucity of Democrats emphasizes your point. I'm not sure, however, that there were, in fact, "so many other qualified" Democratic candidates.
While the 17 Republicans may or may not have been qualified, most were somewhat known at a national level. The Democrats, on the other hand, failed to develop many new prospects. Candidates either deferred to Clinton or were heavily tied to the Clinton orbit. I believe both parties favored candidates with "dynastic" ties to Bush or Clinton.
Post 2016, and as evidenced by the diversity of the results of the recent midterms, many new prospective candidates have arisen. Some, like Senator Warren, have national visibility. Others, like Senators Harris and Booker, are still establishing themselves. Yet others, per the 538 article, have little national standing or reputation.
The Democrats need to avoid the chaos of the 2016 Republican slate. Perhaps some of them began with more moderate approaches, but by the end all were reduced to trying to become more extreme than the others. They also need to settle on several specific, actionable policy imperatives. Even if they're more alike than not, they can't afford to appear as wildly radical or fragmented.
And you're right - the media must report, not forecast. Let the people decide, as they should.
22
@Solaris: I look forward to a flood of ghost-written books describing the candidate's "mission" to seek this office.
Overwhelming grief is the response to the prospect of Trump running for President in 2020. He is surrounded by indictments and it appears there are more on the horizon involving close associates, the office should not shield him from one if criminal acts were committed. Each day feels like eternity while living in polictical chaos and instability. It is my hope the jaws of justice will clamp down upon him and the other cast of characters in his universe in the coming months.
.
A perpetual election cycle, amassing war chests and hitting the Mecca's for 2020 takes a great deal of time away for what needs to take
precedence which is the here and now.
39
What is needed, or rather who is needed, is a Democratic candidate that will address 1) the global existential crisis of climate change, with 2) an FDR-style 21st Century robust plan to expand and grow the economy of these United States with a Green New Deal, 3) investing in creating the infrastructure for this deal: high speed rail, creating new solar, wind, and tidal energy networks, refurbishing the nations power grid, 4) protecting Social Security, 5) protecting and expanding Medicare for all, 6) eliminating mass incarceration through an Emancipation Act that would see low level nonviolent offenders moved out of prison with immediate effect, ending mandatory minimum sentencing, and focusing on the root causes of crime, 7) supporting a universal basic income, 8) paying for this by dramatically reducing US military spending.
130
@Tony Cochran
Thanks. Most important: we need a candidate with a clean background; no history of corruption and personality deficits.
17
@MKathryn. I agree. Way too many candidates - most of who's names I don't recognize or am only vaguely familiar with. The next candidate needs not a "little " charisma, they need a lot of charisma.
Even though a lot of people would vote for Bugs Bunny over Trump, most people vote with their feelings, not just on policy. Although policy needs to be carefully thought out, and needs to be a short list repeated over and over again, by a voice that is firm, confident,and passionate.
25
The 2020 election began on election night 2016. It was complete outrage from Day One, and the campaign was on.
True, the Democrats did not and still do not have an agreed candidate, but their campaign for 2016 was more NeverTrump anyway. That just went into high gear for 2020, and never let up.
Yes, Trump campaigned on his own version of name calling and abuse, and that has never let up either.
The NYT this weekend has had article about how about 2/3 of all voters in both parties are totally fed up with this.
So okay, now Democrats won an election. Do something with that. Show voters what Democrats do with a win. If all there is to show for it is more of the last two years, the Democrats will lose much of what they think they've gained in momentum for the next election.
32
@Mark Thomason: So okay, the Republicans won an election in 2016, except for the Putin-stealing-the-election-for-the-Republicans thing. And they've shown once again what Republicans do with a win. Bush and Trump both cut taxes on the rich. Both skyrocketed the deficit. Both pandered to religious conservatives by denying women reproductive rights. Both embarrassed America in front of the world with their swaggering, bullying, egotistical attitudes. Bush started two wars he couldn't end that cost the taxpayers $4 trillion. Trump attacked and insulted our allies while kissing up to tyrants.
Now, once again, it's time for the Democrats to come in and repair the damage.
2
@Carson Drew -- "except for the Putin-stealing-the-election-for-the-Republicans thing"
That is an excuse that ought to be embarrassing. It cripples Democrats understanding their very real mistakes.
This sort of things could cause another loss. It isn't history, it is future politics in question.
Yes, the Russians did do things we ought not to allow to happen again, by any foreign country. They did it, and other nations did it even more so. We certainly ought not to allow more, by any nation.
But it did not "steal the election." Hillary just lost, and deserved to lose. So did the Democrats (donors and insiders) who nominated Her.
@Mark Thomason: US intelligence agencies have already stated emphatically that Putin interfered in the election on Trump's behalf. Russians have already been indicted by Mueller, and his report is still to come.
Hillary won the popular vote by 3 million.
2
National election reform is needed right now.
*If we could agree to requiring all state primaries and caucuses be held on the same day, all states would have equal nominating power.
*If we could agree to legally limit national office elections to 6 months prior to voting day, elections would be so much less expensive.
*If we could agree to legally limit single entity contributions, elections would be so much cleaner.
*If we could agree that each candidate gets equal minutes of media broadcast time, and no more, elections might be decided by informed voters.
*If we could agree to set a national standard for machine voting, with a paper trail, elections would be so much more honest.
*If we could agree, on anything to clean up our campaign and election mess, we might get the best possible candidates who can't be 100% bought by Citizen's United $$$.
Maybe Democratic candidates should be campaigning on campaign and election reform.
45
@Myrasgrandotter--Mostly I agree, but in my 46 years as a voter I've never voted using a machine. I don't like the idea of that. I'd far rather take my chances with the postal system--my state votes by mail, and it works for us and a few more.
19
@Myrasgrandotter Face facts, we can't even agree on what day it is, no less any of the important issues you mention. And then there is the "less than half" of us who would reelect Trump in a nanosecond. This time the bible has it right. The end is near and Climate Change is the means to end it. Better luck to the new tadpoles who climb out of the ocean.
"The natural inclination of many, somewhat understandably, is simply to be a tougher Trump than Trump, but that inevitably reduces the candidate and the country."
That's the dangerous of his kind of authoritarianism: a backlash that continues to undermine civil society and democracy.
9
All I want from the Democrats is that they keep another far-right government from coming into power, and if that means being moderate and conciliatory to attract a broad tent, so be it. Unfortunarely, Obama’s record is not encouraging. In his first term, Obama had a conciliatory tone, appointed a Republican to his cabinet, and did not even hold Bush-era officials involved in things like torture accountable (some of them are even back in power, when they should have at least been banned from public office the way the SEC bans people who violate regulations from being public company executives). But Obama did not bring the country closer together, did not moderate the Republican Party, and did not even boost the Democratic Party politically. Maybe a white person can pull it off, but we should at least consider the possibility that this strategy will not work.
13
@G.K Yes, it seemed a new day when Obama became president but we all underestimated the deeply ingrained racism of American society. That racism was then exploited by the Republicans. But even most of them did not see how much that racism, combined could be leveraged. It was Trump who brilliantly pushed every lever to resurrect open racism and gain the White House.
1
@G.K You should remember that the Republicans got together when Obama was elected and vowed they would not work with him or agree with him on anything including their own health care act. It's difficult to bring the party together when one party insists you were born in Kenya and you have to defend yourself and your mother. Forget those Republicans?
@G.K
I am a moderate.
I may vote for a left wing candidate for those reasons.
Obama selected some people who had worked for Bush is because he wanted those people not because he was trying to bring the country together.
I am left of center.
If I have to choose in a election between a left wing Democrat or a moderate Republican I will vote for the candidate who is closes to me.
If the Democrat is too far left I may vote for the moderate Republican.
When Romney ran against Obama I voted for Obama.
Obama was a little to the left of me but not by much.
If Romney had run against Sanders I would have voted for him because I am closer to him then to Sanders.
I understand that Obama was to the right of you.
Romney was to the right of him.
Obama was therefore closer to you then Romney was.
You should have voted for Obama for that reason alone.
and the fact the Republicans did not work with him tells me he was much more to the left than you thought he was.
It's because you are way to the left do you think he is a moderate.
When Sanders ran against Clinton you probably voted for him because he was closer to you.
When it came to the election you should have voted for Clinton as she was closer to you then Trump was not because you hated Trump and the fact you supported Sanders over Clinton in the primary should not have stopped you from voting for her in the election.
Trump won because of people like you as you forced her to go to far to the left.
The next candidate will be chosen in the primaries. This time around as compared to 2016, I hope the voters choose someone who comes across as authentic, honest, likable with some charisma, and who has a coherent program which puts working people and their need to catch up at the very center of it but without neglecting the emphasis on civil rights for everyone of whatever persuasion or color. I would personally favor candidates who are holding or have held political office. It goes without saying that the candidate should have great respect for the Constitution and the institutions so carefully and painfully nurtured during the last 200 plus years.
16
@Harold Johnson
Then I assume like me you will not vote for Sanders.
"Yes, we need someone to restore truth, decency and decorum to the presidency, but we also need someone who can lead a post-Trump reconstruction of civil society in which those who are willing can walk away from Trumpism and back into a more normal political reality."
The candidate I have in mind is, unfortunately, deceased. Besides, Mother Teresa wasn't a U.S. citizen.
8
The next president needs to move us forward with critical issues like human rights, wealth and gender equality, universal health care, robust public education, infrastructure investments, and data privacy while protecting Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
The next president needs to be able to stand up to foreign bullies (for example, Putin and Kim) while maintaining positive relations with our allies, domestic bullies (for example, Trump and McConnell) while being able to work across the aisle, and Wall Street bullies while nurturing the economy and jobs.
The next president needs to be able to get members of their own party elected, in large numbers.
The next president needs to be able to fill in these elements of the matrix. At a minimum.
9
@Blue Moon
This candidate will not get my vote.
There are a lot of people like me who hate Trump but will vote for him if the other guy is anything like the candidate you want at a minimum.
You don't understand how far left you are and that you are left of the socialist.
I am against income redistribution.
You don't say you are for that but by saying you for wealth equality tells me you are.
Saying you are for gender equality means to me that you
do not give a person who is a member of a religion that doesn't agree with you the right to follow their religion.
Look at the world from a perspective not only of your own and you won't come across as a person who wants it their way or the highway.
@lucky
We need to help the disabled and provide welfare for the poor who are able-bodied and are actively seeking work. I consider these things as living in a just society and not "income redistribution." As for wealth equality, the ratio of American CEO pay to that of the average worker is obscene as are tax advantages for the economic elite. We have problems funding Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid as well as health care, infrastructure, and public education because the wealthy are unwilling to pay their fair share; we foster a winner-takes-all-and-as-much-more-as-they-can-get mentality that is simply not sustainable. In terms of gender equality, you are welcome to practice your religion at home, but women deserve to be treated equally, by way of pay and opportunities at work. We also need paid maternity and family leave as well as support for child care. These are secular -- not religious -- issues.
1
@Blue Moon
I feel sorry for you.
You don't see it but in a way you have more doctrine that most religions have its just that you believe your doctrine is good because you like the aims.
You believe the aims justifies the means.
This makes you a fascist.
The wealthy pay a lot.
Much more than you think.
They pay more than their share and get back practically nothing for it.
What you really means is that you want to limit how much they have,
Most of them have earned the money they have.
That's more than I can say for most of the poor who do nothing but collect benefits.
Giving the money from the ones who earn it to the ones who haven't is what is unsustainable.
Why would a person want to work if they couldn't keep what they made and why would someone work if someone gave them money to do nothing.
That's not gender equality.
Gender equality are issues about sexual identification not about how much woman make.
I am against discrimination when it comes to employment based on anything other than the ability to do the job.
Telling a religious person how they should raise their children to believe homosexuality is OK when the religion they follow says it isn't is wrong.
I am not against unisex bathrooms as long as you have facilities that are separate as well.
Thinking that you have the right to tell people what they can or can not do because you like what it achieves is what makes most you and many liberals fascist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
I really hope representative Eric Swalwell gets nominated.
He is smart, good looking and will look after the interests of the American people. I really hope Sanders doesn't run again and end up splitting the vote for the Democrats.
16
@Nemesisofhubris 2 words-Tammy Duckworth.
1
Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper is interested in making government work, cooperatively. After Trump, that will be a challenge and necessity.
23
The opposite of Trump is perhaps Obama, or perhaps LBJ, who had an unparalleled mastery of what made Congress tick and ability to get what he wanted from it. But the sort of person who could take on Trump and the Republicans is not at all clear, because muddying the waters is much easier than clearing them.
24
@sdavidc9
Yes, LBJ got Congress to agree to Tonkin Gulf. How well did that work out?
The political scene you describe is perhaps, only a reflection of overly competitive, dynamically changing society that survived a massive shutdown in 2008. We have been living on borrowed time, and cheap, borrowed money.
Advances in cell phone technology and the desire of corporate CEO's to impress their Wall Street subjugators will soon wipe out huge employment opportunities for our working poor. Cash register and similar jobs will be replaced by an app. Many, still existing, customer service jobs will be gone.
Lies about inflation, and our nation's over-indebtedness are already being uncovered. Medicare is being beaten up as we write. More and more doctors are opting out. The FED will raise rates.
Before November 2020, the collapse might begin. Trump, just might take his 47 megabucks, complain about his bad foot and leave the political scene.
27
It seems to me that Mr. Mueller is now in very acute danger of being severely hampered in his work or actually removed from his position by Messrs. Whitaker and Trump.
I assume he has fully prepared himself for this eventuality, but if not, here are my thoughts on the matter.
Ask now for a joint meeting in private with Chief Justice Roberts, Senate Majority Leader McConnell, Current Speaker Ryan, Senate Minority Leader Schumer, Future House Speaker Pelosi and Future Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy.
If McConnell, Ryan and McCarthy choose not to attend, proceed without them.
Describe to those present the findings you have come up with concerning Trump, his family and his associates and the impeachment recommendation you are planning to lodge against Trump with Congress.
Then ask Roberts, McConnell, Schumer, Pelosi, Ryan and McCarthy to join you in an undertaking whereby Trump would be presented with a detailed itemization of all the potential legal charges that are being planned against him, his family and his associates.
And finally, offer Trump a five day period of time during which he will be given the opportunity to have all the potential charges against him, his family and his associates dropped, in exchange for his immediate resignation from the Presidency.
Trump will likely refuse to take up the deal. But at least it would have been offered to him.
So when Congress and the Senate move to impeach and expel him, there will be no one left for him to complain to.
42
@A. Stanton
Makes lots of sense. Worked with Nixon.
Obviously, it all depends on what Mueller has uncovered, but as they say, if it walks like a duck ...
1
@A. Stanton NO. What you seem to be saying is the wealthy and powerful do not have to face the consequences of their illegal deeds as do the lower socioeconomic levels of U.S. residents. The muss and fuss of prosecuting the prominent is too unseemly. What happened to all are equal under the law?
Allowing this president and his cronies to just pick up their marbles and quietly fade away does nothing to discourage the next corrupt aspirant to the presidency.
The supporters of this administration need to know, and the opponents deserve to know the full extent of the malfeasance perpetrated by this group of mostly wealthy white men on our country. Without this knowledge, the needed changes to our electoral system, vetting of candidates for appointed and elected office, and oversight of ethics and performance will not gain the strongest support needed for implementation.
1
@A. Stanton
Which 21 Republic Senators will vote to convict ?
2
I like Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown, an intelligent public servant, who has worked for all of us throughout his career. Surprised he's not on this list. Must be because he's not out there raising money, visiting New Hampshire, and talking to people on Wall Street.
45
'Rumpled Sherrod can spin straw to gold,
A Candidate to have and hold,
‘Gainst Trump a lie spinner
A real rumpled winner,
Will the Dem Convention be so bold?
57
Mark Penn: Mrs. Clinton will fight this out until the last dog dies. She won’t let a little thing like two stunning defeats stand in the way of her claim to the White House.
Hillary lost fair and square to the undeniable force of nature that was Obama in the '08 primary fight but was the choice of a three million vote majority in '16, so that really wasn't a stunning defeat for Hillary so much as it was for American style democracy. And while this reader wouldn't wish it on her at her age and considered how much of her personal life she's already sacrificed for her country, if she mustered her spirit and did choose to run again, knowing Hillary, no one, Democrat or Republican, would have a chance against her.
16
My first reaction was to think this to be Right Wing disinformation. But if there's any truth to it, it is delusional. Fair or not, Clinton is now politically radioactive .
@Leigh
Hillary only received three million more votes than the least qualified, most clownish candidate imaginable. She and her busload of consultants couldn't figure out how to counter-punch. Nor could they figure out how to convey any clear message and purpose of her candidacy.
So why you think that "no one would have a chance against her"? She is highly qualified but horrible at running for office. And we cannot afford to nominate a Democrat who has failed twice to cross the finish line.
Hillary is not likable please please please do not run. Be a patriot and raise money for the nominee.
"America doesn’t need a liberal Trump; it needs precisely the opposite of that."
I'm trying to figure out exactly to what "opposite" refers.
The problem is that it is necessary to field one particular type of candidate to defeat Mr. Trump, but another to actually be able to govern and lead.
"The 2020 presidential race has already begun."
It begun the day that Mr. Trump was elected.
He runs campaigns not a country.
73
Uhh, Mr. Blow, with all due respect, I suggest you take a quick glance at the national debt and advise your readers where the money for that reconstruction will come from. The GOP has blown the national debt beyond recognition. And the spending (err...charging continues). The president wants a wall. The president wants a space force. The president wants to create new subsidies for soybean farmers. Perhaps he hasn't forgotten about his promised 10% middle-class tax cut either. And we have yet to see his infrastructure spending proposal.
Unfortunately, as is his proven habit, he has yet another entity headed towards bankruptcy. Us.
At this point, I would be thrilled if the House can simply step on the brakes. I'm afraid reconstruction is a long ways off.
31
@Tom Q
The kind of Reconstruction--note the capital "R"-- that Charles Blow is discussing doesn't take money. He's not talking about physical infrastructure; he's talking about the reunification of the country. The post-Civil War Reconstruction was incomplete; maybe we can complete it this time.
So Iowa will hold the first caucus of the 2020 election campaign. These are the voters who returned Stephen King to Congress with a large majority. Why should they have such an outsize voice in choosing our next president? I suggest that all candidates or potential candidates agree to boycott the Iowa caucuses.
58
@Cassandra: They should boycott New Hampshire, too, while they're at it. What gives any state the right to pass a law dictating that they hold the first-in-the-nation primary during each presidential election year? What this country needs is a rotating series of regional primaries with no one state holding an advantage over the rest.
99
Why not make the first state to have it’s primary be Michigan. Why? It’s a state that is in flux and It has a multitude of voices and voters with national concerns and democratic ideas that are both specific and mirrored through-out the entire states.
From there on out its should be five regional primaries over 90 days ending in May of 2020.
Four months of modern campaigning is more than enough time for the Democratic party to pick their nominee.
6
What the country needs is mandatory voting. Assured of universal turnout, campaigns would become much shorter and vastly less expensive. This would inherently reduce the power of the Donor Class that preselects our choices during "the money primary.".
14
"...but what about what the country actually needs?"
What the country actually needs is someone like Beto O'Rourke who almost managed to flip a Senate seat in Texas. He didn't pander to the electorate by telling the Republican leaning voters what they wanted to hear.
O'Rourke didn't hire any political consultants. He talked about issues that affect the voters, such as healthcare.
As the Houston Chronicle put it, "Democrat Beto O’Rourke exposed a blue spine across the middle of red Texas."
What the country does not need for Mrs. Clinton to run again. There is no reason to believe that the third or fourth time will be a charm.
192
@RK
Yes, Beto would be grand, if all he needed was soaring idealism, and hope. To withstand the toxic, mega-million candidacy of a 2020 Trump, there needs to be real money poured into the effort, and small-donor contributions alone will not cut it. Democratic hopefuls who don't really stand a chance need to get behind a powerful candidate, one that can bring in big money connections, and eventually speak with one voice. To change the system you have to hold the levers of power, an advantage that Democrats don't currently enjoy. They also need to light the fire of indignant, citizen-engagement, from all walks of life, and that fire needs to match the intensity of the reddest of Trump supporters (minus the criminal activity and terrorism, thank you very much).
19
Beto is my guy as well ... I hope he runs !
2
@RK: "Beto O'Rourke who almost managed to flip a Senate seat in Texas."
Perhaps he'd almost manage to beat Trump, as well.
2
Of course Trump already has a huge campaign chest. He's campaigned for 2020 since the day after the inauguration. All he's done is campaign for 2020, which means he hasn't done any actual work. Where is that "beautiful healthcare plan that is better and cheaper than Obamacare?" Where is Trump's infrastructure week?
167
I don't care about the color, gender or religion of the person who becomes the Democratic nominee. What I do care about is that they respect core American values and seek to represent all Americans, even those who disagree with them.
That starts with the idea that all people are created equal and goes on to include capitalism with guide rails. Let's not rehash debates about the merits of genuine socialism and communism. Capitalism with guide rails has proven itself to be the best way to lift the most people out of poverty.
If that fits under a progressive label that's great. If not, then, whatever. That's how this Democrat is gonna vote.
23
@Mike Marks. That attitude allowed Trump to appoint Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh.
By the way, Secretary Clinton did have a progressive agenda.
We need to look at the implications of both our votes and non votes.
In your state, a non vote didn’t matter and won’t matter matter.
In Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Florida it did causing devastating consequences for progressive policies let alone ideas.
30
@Norman Schwartz
Of course I voted for Clinton. I agreed with 99% of her policy proposals. If her agenda is considered "progressive" then I'm a progressive. But the idea that my vote does not matter is precisely the kind of attitude that Clinton evidenced during her campaign and the reason that Trump is now President.
Hillary lost for many reasons, but the #1 reason was the perception that she, like many liberals, was arrogant and looked down on those who disagreed with her. You evidence the same arrogance in your comment... and that arrogance is what just might enable Trump to win a second term.
Moreover, let me be crystal clear. If being progressive means being against regulated capitalism, then I will never be a progressive and neither will the vast majority of this country.
@Mike Marks
Wow. You have no idea what you are, do you? How about you go ahead and define socialism and communism for us and then tell us how Democrats are even close to it. Then, explain how the violence that is capitalism is better.
2
How many times do we need to experience a responsible and dignified Democratic President repair the dysfunction created by his Republican predecessor, then hand over the government to a Republican President that without fail breaks the nations piggybank over the backs of the middle-class to hand over the contents to the top 1 percent, as if they needed it, in spite of the health of the economy. We just need a Democrat who can effectively communicate the differences of the parties...period.
285
@David I agree. I was a Hillary supporter, based on her deep understanding of the importance of clever and effective progressive policy, but her inability to effectively communicate the differences between the parties was our loss (nobody's good at everything)
So now I think Beto, as he has virtually won Texas already. No Democrat has so well represented why we are the party of the common good.
85
May a leader emerge who can move this mountain and stir every American to the ideals of her inception with "liberty and justice for all". Democracy takes work and we now know we can't leave it to the devices of the few or things can go terribly astray. WE must fight to preserve and protect what we love about our country and never give up our freedoms, so many fought and died to defend.
19
Wise words, as we look forward. The spirit of "when they go low, we go high," is still essential if we are to heal. Not everyone will be on board, but we can begin to shift into the direction of a common future for all.
9
As a retired federal prosecuting attorney (1995-2010) and, among other things, a retired member of the Bar of the U. S. Supreme Court, I add the following prediction.
The Special Prosecutor's investigations,subpoenas, indictments [pending and yet to come] convictions, and report will ensure that Trump will never get to spend any of that re-election cash. He will be out of office, in all likelihood by resignation, long before the TV commercials begin to roll. I'd bet my retirement on it.
521
@Richard Hopefully, Trump will be removed from office, tried, convicted and sentenced (in all likelyhood by the southern district in NY). Removal is not enough. A harsh example must be made of this malignancy, so that others in generations to come will have a reminder of what happens when a person, even a president, attempts to put him/herself above the law.
198
@Richard
I believe you are right, it's Muller time!
51
@Richard
"...Trump will never get to spend any of that re-election cash"
Maybe, hopefully, he won't be able to spend it on his re-election, but he, or his family, will spend it. They are certainly aren't going to give it back. Trump will view that money as his to do as he pleases or as he needs; the same as his "charity". The Trump/Kushner real estate "empire" is always starved for cash and, with Trump out of the White House, their leverage for Russian and Saudi money will be gone. The Trumps have a solid history of walking out on creditors and vendors. It is unlikely they would view campaign doners any differently, especially if they're on the ropes of indictments.
64
As an Independent who is disgusted by the Republican Party, I believe the Democratic Party made a strong start in the mid-terms and worked very hard at the grassroots level to re-energize voters. I'm a little worried, though, by all the President wannabes that appear to be popping up. I remember it happening with the Republicans and we ended up with Donald Trump. I would much prefer it if all the presidential hopefuls chose the best candidate from among themselves and support him or her with all their hearts and pocketbooks. Too much is on the line in 2020. Until Trump is gone and there's no chance that Pence will succeed him, our democracy won't be safe.
323
@MKathryn. Who are saying should choose? they decide among themselves? Democracy is where we all choose...that is when we vote in primaries. Every responsible citizen should check out these candidates and support the one who best represents their ideas and ideals.
2
@MKathryn
Until the Republican subculture has been eradicated, democracy will not be safe. Trump is just a symptom.
2
@MKathryn Hm, reminds me of all the back room horsetrading that went on before the open primaries and conventions.
The Dems are the architects of identity politics, so it would seem difficult for them to set this aside. This is the reason for much of the "hatred, misogyny, racism and division" to quote the article. Yugoslavia was the original balkanized society where people were identical in all respects except for language, culture, religion. In our multi-cultural society, identity politics is a recipe for disaster and will lead to civil war of the sort experienced in Yugoslavia unless the identify divisions promoted by Dems goes away once and for all.
We have much in common and can have a great multi-cultural society, but not by constantly creating divisions based upon cultural traditions, religion, and racial identify.
To say that one is against illegal immigration, does not mean that one is against legal immigration and the positive benefits of educated newcomers with diverse perspectives. Yet, Dems immediately jump to this warlike response when any suggestion of constraints on illegal immigration is mentioned.
14
@Dan
I would agree with you that one can be against illegal immigration but fully supportive of legal immigration but i think it's a caricature to say that democrats favor illegal immigration no matter what. We would do well as a nation to not find discord when it's not there. There is enough to disagree about with making up differences that do not, in the main, exist.
46
Dan....Republicans have been successfully using the Whites R Us strategy for 50 years.
Democrats have simply been saying that non-white lives matter in addition to white lives....and that has really offended a certain type of white person.
Democrats do need to clearly articulate their support for legal immigration in order to overcome the Mad Hatter 'caravan' voter that is easily frightened to death.
151
@Dan
I agree. If America continues down the road of identity politics, its future will look like Iraq, Yugoslavia, or Rwanda. That or we'll end up fighting round two of the Mexican-American War.
I can't think of a single functional democracy where political affiliation is based on race or religion. It is a guaranteed blood bath.
4
"Yes, we need someone to restore truth, decency and decorum to the presidency, but we also need someone who can lead a post-Trump reconstruction of civil society in which those who are willing can walk away from Trumpism and back into a more normal political reality."
This sounds like someone who is not running--Michelle Obama.
51
If all the advantage goes to candidates from wealthy states, with broad networks of wealthy donors already established, then what difference is there between any of them and President Trump? If all we do is replace a Republican guardian of Wall Street with a Democratic guardian of Wall Street, we voters who are not sharing in the largesse may as well stay home and wait patiently for 2024.
19
@Mark Lebow I find it impossible to imagine a Democratic candidate who is not very different in real impact on this country than Trump. Even if not the perfect candidate, the choice will be clear -- no matter who it is, we can't wait till 2024. The country can't afford it. No one who cares about the future of America or the world can "stay home."
54
@Mark Lebow
If you stay home in 2020 because you are “not sharing in the largesse” then you will never share in the largesse. Courts matter. Judges matter. Staying home and not voting in 2020 means you unconditionally surrendered.
I am hopeful that the national Dems pay attention to how Democrats overtook Republicans in local state and federal districts long felt to be traditional Republican territory: gun safety, health care, education, and infrastructure. Stacey Abrams lost her election by no more than roughly 50,000 votes in a state traditionally tucked into the Republican column. It's very possibly that had her opponent not exercised voter suppression, she would have had those 50,000 votes and more. A traditionally Republican Congressional district outside Atlanta turned blue at both state and national levels. The voting power is there for candidates that speak to real issues of concern.
We cannot afford to spend another four years flailing about with the politics of hate, distraction, and discord. There is much real work to be done to make a future for our children and grandchildren. That it is hard work doesn't mean we shouldn't do it. That candidates will need to speak frankly to people's sincere concerns about the threats to their children's lives in school, to environmental safety, to modernized transportation, and to decency in civil discourse means a warmed over national campaign will miss an opportunity to ignite the kind of intensity that led to Democratic victories in the midterm.
97
Please, please don’t omit climate change from the list of what matters most. How many more natural disasters do we need before America gets that?
5
Spring 2020 should narrow the field in a most interesting way. With California moving it’s primary earlier, that voice will speak much louder.
I agree that long-term we must somehow close the divide between Urban and Rural America, and that challenge will keep many of us occupied for decades. But an asp has locked his jaws on our leg and is furiously pumping poison into our veins. It must be removed if we are to survive to work these larger issues.
I see a lot of fine candidates who can do that job, and I will actively promote which ever combination of people we pick
43
@Curtis Wilbur: The "opposition" gained a lot and came very close in other critical races this past election. The candidate who can close the deal will need to be similar to how Obama appeared as he burst onto the scene. He or she will need to be smart, unencumbered, refreshing, attractive, confident yet vulnerable. That person will need to actually have those qualities, not appear to be that way. If the dems were smart they'd start banking today on Beto O'Rourke. He's the real deal, has all the qualities, none of the baggage, enjoys tremendous popular support and shines like a laser on everything that's wrong with the GOP as it now stands. If they insist on Pelosi/Clinton all over again, they will have shot themselves in the foot and the heart without needing to pull the trigger.
3
@Curtis Wilbur
America was founded as a largely agrarian society. Today 83% of Americans live in urban areas in the city or most in the suburbs. Cities are diverse and looking at the GOP caucus you are in for an awful lot of pain.
@Curtis Wilbur The asp analogy is very apt!
"We understand the ambitions, but what about what the country actually needs?.....We are in the middle of nothing short of an ideological civil war in this country. People’s interests, inclinations and sources of information are so divergent that they are diametrically opposed."
These 3 sentences pretty much sum up the state of play in today's America; But the most important phrase is, I think, "sources of information are so divergent".
I just don't think you can ever "restore" this country until people get back to sharing one objective, evidence-based truth.
Up until Donald Trump, there was polarization, to be sure, but he really upped the ante by bring conspiracy thinking and lies mainstream.
The man instinctively knew the more you repeat a lie the more it appears truth. Just look at how he's changed American views of Robert Mueller.
Too many Democratic candidates, too little charisma (No, Hillary, I beg you: do not even think about it).
So many candidates with so-so messages. To "restore" America you have to convince half the country it needs restoring in the first place.
Charles Blow is right that "liberal" Trump is not what's needed in 2020. Whoever wins the prize of running against Trump (trust me, its hardly a prize), had better figure out "how" as well as "what" needs changing or it will quickly become just another big ho-hum from the man we need to overturn if we have any hope of saving the country.
222
@ChristineMcM
Thank you.....I saw that you were among the most enthusiastic, articulate, and consistent supporters of Ms. Clinton during the last election cycle. Your current recognition that she is no longer able to lead us forward is heartening. We all must move ahead, and I thank you for recognizing this.
26
@James: Thanks for your comment too. Yes, I was a huge supporter in 2016, and regret her loss, but can't possibly see her in politics now. I hope she realizes that too. It's time to nurture the next generation of Democratic leaders, as they are closer to the pulse of the country.
23
@ChristineMcM
Well spoken. The "how" is critical path to the "what" and will require pragmatic trade-offs in order to move country and its people forward. Vision is mandatory to inspire people. Otherwise, not enough people will be politically engaged. But to avoid a repeat of Trump or most republicans, demonstrated competence rooted in honest explanation of facts, their magnitude, their consequence and their implications is mandatory. America has the intellectual, financial and social capital to lead the world to a better place. We're lacking the leadership.
11
While the 2020 Democratic candidate is important, what's more important for 2020 is massive voter registration drives and donations to voter registration groups and continuing litigation against Republican gerrymanders, voter suppression tactics, replacement of black-box voting machines with auditable ones and a new Voting Rights Act passed by the new House of Representatives re-asserting citizens right to vote and the right of one's vote to be counted and crushing the Republican Jim Crow political criminal syndicate than can't stand democracy.
Trump 'won' in 2016 due to a rigged vote.
Brian Kemp just stole Georgia's governorship thanks to Jim Crow; Rick 'Medicare Fraud' Scott and Ron 'Mini-Me-Trump' DeSantis just stole a Florida Senate seat and the governorship due to Florida's continuing status as the world-champion of misleading ballots, mysterious undervotes and Republican political malfeasance.
The Democrats are the only major party that has an honest interest in living wages, infrastructure, green energy, climate change, ethics, campaign finance reform, healthcare reform, a progressive income tax, women's rights, voting rights, civil rights, pluralism, education, Wall St. regulation and all the basic building blocks of a decent modern society.
Painting the toenails of the rich while feeding the masses the Bible, assault rifles, and Whites R Us supremacy might Make The Confederacy Great Again, but they have already Made America A Trump-GOP Toilet.
Flush Hard In 2020
736
@Socrates- I originally was gonna send my post to Mr Blow but he does not need it, however, you do and the 325 recommend people do too if the democrats want to win in 2020.
Geez when I saw this column with the headline, I said there he goes again, using hyperbole, comparing our current situation with the Civil War, which would be totally wrong, ie the reds have not succeeded from the blues and a full scale shooting war has not happened.
The last six paragraphs of your column were very Lincolnesque and MLKesque.
It is exactly what we have to do now.
It was well written.
15
Socrates you are the best. Keep it up.
17
@Socrates
It is a given that Republicans always win in a Florida recount. Something fishy in the Sunshine State.
15
The battle is on:P the R have come forward to tell us that "entitlements" such as Social Security and Medicare, and the veterans Administration and Indian Health Services health care systems must be drastically cut because federal revenues are so much reduced. (Because of the recent tax cut, but who cares?)
If the D can meet this challenge and offer a plan that saves Social Security and Medicare, the people who take the lead role in the fight will have the inside track for 2020. If the Democrats waffle or can't put together a plan, it doesn't matter WHO they run in 2020.
61
"Forgiveness is the only way to reverse the irreversible flow of history."
- Hannah Arendt
Mr. Blow, an interesting take on the need to welcome back "prodigal partisans". I think ther millions of Americans who cheer Trump's hatred, misogyny, racism are lost, there seems to be no basis for conversation. But those who have "excused or forgiven" Trump?
Perhaps. I just hope there is enough willing to "walk away from Trumpism and back into a more normal political reality" to matter. You can compromise on policies but you cannot split the difference on hatred.
I don't know which Democratic candidates can rise to become the "special caliber of leader" we need. I don't know if it will be a centrist or a progressive (I know many feel strongly about this). But hopefully we can all agree that it will not be Ms. Clinton 4.0.
Another four years of Trump and forgiveness will not be enough to reverse the course Trump has set us on. Winning IS a necessary first step to restoration.
93
@LT
Two hundred years ago Thomas Chandler Haliburton wrote, "When a man is wrong and won't admit it,he always gets angry."
We Canadians are known to say I'm sorry even when we are in the right. Your political divide is not solvable. I suspect most of us believe this will not end well. Maybe it is time we all shared our fear. It is time to stop the blame and see if we can find a map into a better future.
Mark Twain said There is nothing so bad that someone doesn't benefit and nothing so good that someone doesn't suffer.
It is time for centrists and liberals to surrender and sue for peace they will not relent until we destroy ourselves. We are intruders in their world and we don't know what they want to do with us.
2
I listened to Stacey Abrams give a speech a few days ago that concluded her candidacy for Governor here in Georgia. She and her speech reminded me of another great person, Barack Obama.
You have to watch it, it's on youtube, it's flawless and passionate. I was just so impressed. I don't think she would run but if she ever did, she's a force, but also, so compassionate. I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.
375
@cherrylog754 I think she is BRILIANT! What a genuine human being. Everything that is being said about her all true.
14
@cherrylog754
I agree. Ms. Abrams is brilliant, talented and passionate in her ideas. She must run again, for the sake of Georgia and for the country.
14
@cherrylog754. Every time I hear Stacey Abrams speak, I am even more impressed. Intelligent, articulate, principled, charismatic—everything our president is not. She said this morning on Jake Tapper that she was certain she will run for elected office in the future, just not sure what. (“Right now, I need a nap.”). I’m hoping she will run for Senate in 2020 to displace David Perdue.
13
I hear you Mr. Blow and agree but consider this. In the very deep South, two progressive black candidates almost won their elections, even when faced with entrenched voter suppression tactics. If they can get his close against odds like that, that tells me the majority wants what they offer. The people don't want another warmed over blue dog Democrat.
Look, Trump has about 1/3 in his back pocket. They will never desert him. It's the remaining 2/3 that will vote Trump out.
I watched Sherrod Brown today on Meet the Press. He said we need a candidate that respects the dignity of work. Where is it written that progressives who want to establish green energy, universal healthcare, maternity leave, and a living wage, do not respect the dignity of work? Supporting organized labor is respecting the dignity of work. Raising the minimum wage is respecting the dignity of work. Progressive candidates all want these things.
Somehow, policies that restore the lost factories of Ohio are viewed as respecting the dignity of work. I don't get it.
Market capitalism killed those jobs which is why you can buy a 50 inch, 4K TV for $300. What gets lost in the discussion is that there are new jobs that will replace those have been lost. The past will never ever be restored. Trump got elected promising that he can. He cannot. No one can. The past is gone.
Democrats must get the message out that we must build a new future for all. No more retreads.
646
@Bruce Rozenblit
I wish I saw a glimmer of that kind of hope at the top.of the party. Even with the incoming progressives, the fight for a progressive seat at the table is going to be a tough one. Looking at the emerging 2020 field, I am not optimistic that the push-pull will be any less ugly than it was last go around.
We'll see...
47
@Bruce Rozenblit Hillary Clinton ran on a new economy with a need for new job skills. She lost the electoral college but won the popular vote.
15
I have had the opportunity to talk with Sherrod Brown. I am impressed with his intelligence, strength, and compassion. He understands real people and real politics. He is the real thing.
23
I agree, we need to establish democracy anew, with safeguards against corporate plutocracy and the oligarchy we've fallen into. But I have to say I am pessimistic that we will end up going in that direction without a struggle. Already, we can see the left oligarchy readying itsrlf to swoop in as saviors from Trump and the reception to the likes of Bloomberg isn't the icy cold one would have hoped for.
In their distaste and fear of Trump, people seem to have forgotten that neither Bloomberg nor Steyer, nor Pritzker have the experience, worries, or the interests of the lower classes to guide them.
Oligarchs to the right, oligarchs to the left, and nary a democracy in sight.
--
95 Million Losers
https://wp.me/p2KJ3H-2vV
34
@Rima Regas--and yet I've noticed that progressives are still having trouble getting the message across. The African American progressives in Florida and Georgia reluctantly conceded to traditional white male Republican candidates in their runs for governor.
I don't know anything about Steyer or Pritzker but Mike Bloom has experience as the three term Mayor of New York City. Guess what--New York City survived and did just fine.
5
@Rima Regas
I think you need to examine the definition of oligarch. Because a person is wealthy does not necessarily mean that he/she will always support the interests of the rich. The often maligned George Soros has contributed to liberal causes as have others including the Rockefellers and Tom Steyer.
4
@Rima Regas
America is not nor was it ever meant to be a democracy.
America is and was intended to be a divided limited power constitutional republic of united states where only white Anglo-Saxon Protestant men who owned property were divinely naturally created equal persons with certain unalienable rights.
Indeed America is particular type of republic. The only representative directly originally elected was your member of the House.
Unless we understand the governing political reality nature of our country we can not improve nor reform a thing.
4