Trump lowers the bar again. Rather then policy and ideas it will be yelling and screaming and bully actions. The candidate will not only have to have good policy but be able to stand up to the bully and his insults. This creates a new dynamic. Remember trump hovering over Clinton as she tried to answer questions during the debate? His physical presence was just short of violence, stealing her space, trying to intimidate, trying to be the center regardless of her speaking. These are the things that the Dem candidate will have to deal with. Meanwhile they will also have to show they have talent and ideas. Trump, he just has to be the biggest thug for his Base.
2
If Democrats want a chance at winning in 2020 they need a real message/agenda. Bread and butter issues. Something beyond identity politics and global warming. People are tired of hearing about race and gender issues.
9
It is going to be Buttigieg and Warren. The two most educated, intelligent folks, who have clear plans to create a balanced civilized USA for everyone.
We need educated people running our country for all. No more corrupt, lying, selfish fools. We seem to have put idiots in charge of the madness taking us to wars again. No more zero-sum predatory capitalism.
5
With every NYT story or Op-Ed that I read about the 2020 election, my stress level rises. They all seem to presuppose some mysterious electability factor that, it is implied, most/all Democratic candidates are missing in some part. It’s the use of social media! It’s a reaction against Donald Trump! It’s the ability to appeal to white people in Pennsylvania!
What if it is the clarity and consistency of their vision? What if we like Pete Buttigieg or Elizabeth Warren because we sense in them the courage of their convictions—and, in the case of Warren, the willingness to get specific about what those convictions would entail.
We certainly have a consistency of sorts with Donald Trump—a racist, xenophobic, self-interested one, but it’s a consistency and maybe that’s a factor in electability. If so, can we allow ourselves to promote and talk about Buttigieg’s consistent thoughtfulness or Warrent’s consistent thoroughness?
1
The heck with the presidency! Let him keep it. Democrats need to concentrate on keeping control of the House and winning control of the Senate. Simple as that.
6
The saddest thing of all is that a national party like the Republican would ever run a candidate like Donald Trump after learning about him. They have seen and learned he is not overly intelligent, not well prepared for any political negotiation, ignorant of the office of president, totally ignorant of American history and an outright liar documented at over 7000 times while in office. This is truly a mystery.
3
I hate this type of political analysis because it's predicated on negativity. Show me something positive. Tell me about something good happening in the campaign. No need to spin. And every time the name of the president is mentioned that raises his profile. He doesn't care if you give him a poor mention because all press is good press to him. So let's turn our backs to him. Democrats... tell me what you will do as president. That's what I want to hear. Right now Senator Warren's words and actions are the most presidential. All the other candidates should take a hint.
4
First off, Bruni has a darn good point. If you want it translated into Cheap Nietszche, we’re got a bit of a case of slave mentality; if you prefer Cheap Freud, we’ve contracted reaction formation. Either way, we’re imitating the guy who punched us.
We’d do well to listen.
As for the candidates, right now I’d say Biden/Harris. Best chance of winning, sorry.
St. Bernie? No. Too easy to demonize; too much of a one-trick pony; too little clarity about how stuff works.
Warren? Excellent explanations; excellent staff. Born Senator; please go back there.
Buttigieg? Very attractive candidate. But that whole inexperience thingie...
Booker? Somehow, he just looks thin when he’s campaigning. He just ain’t got it.
Klobuchar, and Wossername? Somehow, they just ain’t got it. Please, please: go back to the Senate.
The Whole Passel of Congressmen? God, no. They all nag too much. And they all look like John Kerry somehow.
Williams? As much of a charlatan as Trump.
Insleee, Hickenlooper? Good guys, no traction.
Above all: PLEASE, nobody who’s a Lefty version of Trump. We’d get creamed; Trump’s one genius-level talent is being a loudmouthed, hrabby fool, and he’s just better at it.
Oh, and willya just plain VOTE this time? Pretty please? Pretty please with sugar on top?
2
first, stop using the president's surname. we have become an oligarchy of the very rich. the democrats must show the severe damage done by this administration and call out the propaganda its proponents believe from their beloved faux news. i find it ironic that many supporters of this president castigate cnn, when cnn is quite happy to plaster the mug of this joke of a president just as much as the state tv channel faux (american pravda)..it is the legitimacy given to this clown by all media that allowed this debacle to occur..and it is still on a big roll because the one thing this president knows how to do is be a buffoon and get air time. clowning and entertaining is his milieu...instead of looking out for all citizens. only his white rich friends at maralago matter to him..oh, and putin.
2
The Dem's response is not in response to Trump. It's a response to the almost 50% of the country who thinks like Trump. This election will be referendum on the type of country America wants to be. The sad part is that it's so close. We are in the "quiet civil war" time. If Trump's America loses, they will not go away quietly. If the Dem's America loses, they won't either. The Dem's need to stop renouncing Trump because in so doing, the are renouncing half the country. They need to make clear who they are against. And still draw the line against hate - what this "quiet civil war" is really all about.
3
Certainly I won't be the only one who points out the obvious: any one of the potential democratic nominees would make a better president than Trump.
The fact is that every potential democratic nominee thus far would be a reasonable choice to be our president.
I'd go so far as to say that pretty much any one of them not ever becoming President of the United States will be a loss. With such a breadth and width of solid talent, will our fellow citizens really choose again an individual who has consistently shamed us in front of the entire world?
4
I am appalled by the emphasis that the pundits are placing on black and white. Obama was not elected because he is black, but because of his charisma, intelligence, good looks and exemplary family values. Trump defeated Hilary because the democrats put up the wrong candidate. Even though she was absolutely qualified to be president, she was not electable. To win in 2020, the democrats have to nominate a candidate with charisma, intelligence, charm and communication skills. In my opinion, the most impressive candidates are Biden and Buttigieg. I think they would make a very strong ticket, combining experience and youth. I don't think any of the current female candidates are electable.
1
I think you are off in your analysis here, especially about Pete Buttigieg. If you listen to what he's saying, he's saying both that voters handed the keys to Trump because the system was not working for them - all was not fine. Moreover, he doesn't think that Trump was a mere aberration and believes that only a candidate who is forward-looking can win against Trump in 2020.
Have you ever noticed that Republicans don't have "get out the vote" campaigns? That's because they don't have to have them. Republican voting fluctuates very little from election to election; the numbers are pretty steady because they support their party's candidates. Democrats, on the other hand, are always the ones knocking on doors, phone banking, offering transport, etc.--because their voting numbers wildly fluctuate. Donald Trump won in 2016 because so many Democrats simply wouldn't support Hillary Clinton for whatever reason--didn't like her personally, wanted Bernie Sanders or someone else, disagreed with her on a policy point, what have you. If we did what Republicans do--always support the chosen candidate and realize that no one person is going to hit every point--we'd be a lot better off. The "if I can't get what I want, I won't play" attitude is killing us.
4
The fliers, fake polls with menacing covers, web ads, posters and idiots knocking on my door beg to differ with your claim that Republicans don’t campaign.
1
@Trish Bennett: James Comey shell-shocked Hillary's voters with Anthony Weiner's computer the week before theelection. It was a deadly subliminal "yuck" factor that discouraged voting.
3
To quote the old English philosopher - you can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you get what you need,
6
The hat trick here is to work around Mitch McConnell blocking vital aid to states needing to safeguard their voting apparatus.
Or we will see 2016 again.
3
Amazing that a professional analyst like Frank doesn't realize that if there 20, 30, 40 people are looking for being president...the American dream.
So, during the next 9 months, the Democratic field will naturally winnow and current supporters of those falling aside will move on to other choices.
In Spring 2020, the battle will continue with 5 or 6 candidates collecting primary votes rushing to the Convention.
Frank, Trump is a loser and 50 people could easily be an acceptable alternative. A better analysis was expected from you.
1
Just Vote! Voter participation is appalling. Of course, the right doesn't want you to vote because attitudes, demographics, class, and even religious beliefs point to ideals more closely aligned with the Democratic party than Republicans.
5
Trump has destroyed the credibility of the office of the presidency. Whoever takes that office will have a great deal of work to do just to restore it.
7
I have a theory -- the next boyfriend theory. Whatever you didn't like in the last one, you look for in the new one. There's so much not to like in what I hope will be the old one (King Minus). But whatever you say about him, he breathes hot. Obama, of course, was coolness itself. So, I believe the next president will be less crass, more cool.
I like Sen. Warren, but she's passionate, maybe not cool enough. Mayor Pete has the cool, classy thing going. Thankfully, my state is not going near last in the primaries this time, so I will vote for my favorite, without considering electability. But I hope any of the Dems can beat our current president. I can't take much more of this.
4
@Pontifikate I meant, "Whatever you didn't like in the last one, you look for its opposite in the new one".
Currently my top favorite is Mayor Pete (I have a hard time with his last name and with the spelling of other names), he is smart savvy and has not shown fear of Fox News or of the insults thrown out by Mr Trump. Also he's smart and truly thinks through things, he certainly has a interesting background and life. Maybe he is exactly what we need. After Major Pete in no particular order I like Kamlia Harris ( excuse my spelling it's not a strong point of mine) Elizabeth Warren, and Cory Booker. All of have shown they should be given a lot of thought regarding their platforms.
Just my half a cent for whatever that's worth...
1
There's certainly no shortage of political talent among Democrats. What is still so incomprehensible to me is the support Trump gets from the GOP in Congress. Many MUST know they're covering for a man who is probably suffering from dementia. But we must get control of both houses in 2020, and send McConnell packing. Trump tells us who he is every day, and that I can sort of handle. But the state houses and the big one in Washington are so packed with crocodiles that it looks more like a zoo than a deliberative body. We must all take responsibility for the Tea Party- the slickest tricksters that ever played a winning game of checkers at the barber shop down in Mayberry, USA (sorry Andy). How they crept up on ALL of us, especially white folks resigned to getting along with everyone is the BIG story here. Not liking the last 70 years of social progress and justice is one thing, but reminding them all over again "how unfair" it is, and add to that giving away our jobs to the Mexicans and the Chinese- as much a Republican policy as a Democrat's- is the final straw. How do you get everybody to understand that economically, there is no United States? Everything comes from everywhere, and there's no going back- only forward. We grow a lot of food, and we have some great computer and aerospace companies. But there is one last thing we ALL must remember- America IS beautiful, and it must be protected and preserved for us and for future generations. Country, city- it doesn't matter.
3
Frank, I don’t know why you think the Democrats stand a chance. I like the way things are going right now so why would I take l a chance on an unknown - 23 unknowns.
3
@Unaligned: Several of them are pretty well know: Biden, Sanders, Warren, for example. Harris is not a stranger either.
If any democratic candidate attacks another candidate it would surly be a thoughtless waste of precious time. Even denouncing Trump might also be time poorly spent. The audience watching this event would certainly know more than enough to despise the man. That the media has given so much attention to the number of candidate is surely a failure on their part. So what? With all the eyes on the election this should not have garnered so much attention. But the echo chamber being what it is, there you have it. The same media that six months prior to throwing his hat in the ring Biden was at the top of every poll or so it see,med. How'd that happen? Easily the greatest repudiation of Trump is Pete Buttigieg. Times have changed.
3
"I'm not Trump!" may be a good campaign slogan, and I like that. I'd hate to think of eight years of Trumpian insanity and incompetence. However, a candidate defining his/her virtues by saying he/she is not as bad as Trump is not enough. Anyone with an ounce of integrity and a few grams of competence -- and that's pretty much the whole overcrowded Democratic slate -- is better than Trump. Quit telling me what you aren't; tell me what you are.
What are your plans for rebuilding roads, bridges, and railroads? How about healthcare -- single payer, universal insurance, Medicare for everyone? What are your plans for cleaning up the environment and trying for renewable energy and materials? Not least of all, how do you play to pay for it?
Give me some answers to those questions, and I'll listen to you. I don't need to know you're an improvement over Trump; I already know that and it's such a low standard as to be almost meaningless. Give me something positive.
2
You are overcomplicating things. The Democratic candidate must not just beat Trump, but obliterate him and all his Congressional groupies. It is vital to the future of the country that this happens. What it requires is a high turnout, particularly of the young, and party solidarity. The debates should reduce active candidates by at least one third and by the first primary it would be surprising if eight were left. Not to worry - just let it happen.
2
Make no mistake that all media outlets including this paper may say they despise Trump, but they sure love the money he is generating for them. This paper, the Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC and others will have lay off people as their readership/viewership (and related revenue) plummet if Trump were to lose in 2020. This era is the last one big media will enjoy as he is their life support system. Kind of like keeping Grandma hooked up to a ventilator until everyone can say their final goodbyes.
2
the main stream media likes Biden, where as the progressive wing like warren (incl. the head of the dnc). 99% of all the candidates that are running are to get voter data. that's all. The same people are financing all the dems, who does not have any real grass roots support. look how many people actually show up at ANY democrat's events. All small venues.
there may be also be a splitter strategy at play. where there is a Biden vote and all the cumulative non-Biden vote in every state. so in every state the non-Biden vote suppress each other's vote so that biden wins. So by having all the people running they all take each other's votes away so Biden can win the primary with only 22% +/- approval of the democratic party.
the corporate and establishment are backing Biden to win because he will help wall street not Main street.
2
A campaign that promotes tax-funded abortion at any time up to birth, open borders, higher taxes, elimination of private health insurance, etc. will not defeat Trump in any state he won in 2016.
2
@Hank: There is no such campaign and there will not be one.
2
“The shadow cast by Trump is bloated beyond measure”-your words.there are therefore no old, overweight, delusional white men who have a bad combover and five foot long ties running in the Democratic field.The candidates have to be empathetic,honest, smart and absolutely devoted to Constitutional values.You are correct that Trump will pick the Democratic nominee-so many voters are so hungry for a candidate who inspires and cares for our values that the Democratic field has a wide mandate to be everything Trump is not.Most people work hard and play by the rules-they need a president who reflects these values.
2
Biden / Harris will trounce Trump and if Biden commits to a single term, they will destroy Trumpism once and for all.
2
All of these are valid insights. The one lesson of the Obama White House is this: When you take power away from the Republicans take boot to neck. This is the era of The Great Corruption. Do not let them destroy more of our institutions. Crush their dreams for a change.
1
I thought he had already decided that he is the president-for-life and via executive order is cancelling the democratic party.
“Even if he leaves the White House shortly after November 2020, his DNA will linger.” Yes, Trump would have convince many, many Americans that honesty is the greatest enemy of political power.
There’s no question that Trump is defining the Democratic race. As a lifelong member of the party, I would vote for a ham sandwich if it would remove him for office. Nominate a dill pickle as running mate. The country would still be far better off than it is now.
2
Trump "defines" the Democratic primaries now, but it has been Democratic Party leadership cravenness and ineptitude all along which has "defined" the rise of Trump and the associated world historic shame of America.
While the country buries its collective head in deep denial.
1
Defeating Trump will not be easy because Trump has arrived on the political scene when white nationalists are attacking liberal democracy seemingly everywhere in Europe as well in the US. Racism has been resurrected as a major political force that can win elections. Historically in the US blacks, Mexicans, and Native Americans have taken the brunt of racist attacks from the white nationalists. Trump has added Muslims as a group to attack and the white nationalists are including Jews. The Democrats need to make a convincing case for liberal democracy to stem the white nationalist tide. They need to show people who feel left out that liberal democracy has something to offer them. As an alternative Trump is offering something that sounds like a fascist dictatorship and the white nationalists seem to want to go in that direction. It is very difficult to decide at this point which Democratic candidate has the best chance to defeat Trump but it needs to be someone who can connect on some level with people not sold on liberal democracy.
And if this 'Booming Economy' crashes in the next year - A Democrat will have to pick it up again. Just like Obama had to pick it up from Bush Jr.
3
In theoretical physics, this phenomena is akin to the "Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle", which states, in so many words, that when an attempt is made to measure an entity, the effect of the measurement modifies the entity. Bruni may not be a physicist, but he understands intuitively the process. A well-reasoned article reflective of Bruni's intellect.
1
Most of the 24 DEM candidates espouse loser platforms (happily not so by Biden, Hickenlooper, Klobuchar) – re: expensive / bureaucratic / disadvantageous / obtuse … free college for all (trade schools & community colleges perhaps better), debt forgiveness (who / how is it paid for, and will there be reimbursement for the ethical students who did pay up), “reparations” (despite 3 million slaves in 1865 & “X” millions in the 18th century – vs the logical / plausible reparations for 120,000 Japanese internees 1941-to-1945), and the most pernicious / loser idea of “MediCARE For All” – obfuscated for much of the American electorate, with the goal of obliteration of private insurance (will never happen), impacts 100 million workers with insurance via employers, and 50 million seniors on MediCARE with most having Supplemental private insurance – and it’s not a negative view of the poor (we admire NY’s enhanced MediCAID, and Obamacare / ACA, and proposals to improve health care), but the Congressional machinations over “MediCARE for All” and the DEM control, both Houses & Governor, of my NY State are initiating a similar “pipe dream” destined to fail, will lead no where, including DEM contender failure for supporters of these “loser platforms”. Hopefully I’ll not have to “write-in” again (1st time since voting in 1962) – as I did for Kasich in 2016 – and will stay tuned to this vital campaign season and 2020 election.
1
Biden is ahead because he appeals to a larger amount of people than the other candidates.
That’s it.
If you want to win, you gotta be able to be wide.
2
This is an example of setting up a fallacious assumption and then logically arguing the assumption. There is a massive elephant under the rug, treason. And I can't imagine why people as smart as Frank Bruni continue to overlook the most fundamental problem confronting America and the future of our Republic's Democracy - the fact that an American President, supported by the Senate Majority Leader in concert with a GOP Congressional Cabal as well as the Attorney General - are all complicit in adhering to a Russian enemy, giving Putin aid and comfort.
Policies and the high ground of Democrat's moral superiority must not be the material controlling issue of 2020. Biden has already put restoring the soul of America on his front burners, which addresses the fact that the future of our Democracy in on the line. And Bruni left out Biden.
It is my hope that in the "debates" this week, a candidate will have the guts to address the elephant, because Americans need to face the fact that the future of our Republic is in real jeopardy. So I look forward to hearing Eric Swalwell, who is blunt, does not equivicate, and has the guts to take on the NRA. Merely listening for whose lofty rhetoric is the most appealing and falling in love, is not leading from the front, it is pandering to hot buttons.
This election is not about Democrats winning, it is about restoring we the people's Democracy gone awry.
3
Bruni did NOT “leave out Biden,” and I’d suggest that less speechifyin’ would be a good idea. Speechifyin’ tends to make us blind as dead bats.
1
Unfortunately, this horrible excuse of a human being has an influence on everything. He's rallied supporters by appealing to age old fears & making unrealistic promises. The damage he's ensued on this country & the world is devastating. We need someone, anyone who will beat him. We need to rally together & support whoever the Dem candidate is, regardless of our own personal likes & dislikes. We give Trump, not only too much power but too much credit. He's a bully, take away his false superiority & his fake sense of entitlement & kick him to the curb. But to do this we have to unite. And we have to relentlessly nag our representatives to secure our elections. Otherwise, it's all for naught.
1
I've been so disgusted with the current administration that I would vote for a chimpanzee. A friend said, but we already have one in office. We have been dragged down into his swamp and low class tactics. He claims he loves this country but I think not. Anyone who truly loves our country would not be BFF with autocrats and attempt to emulate them. We, the Dems must take command of those few key states. We must rid ourselves of those GOP obstructionists once and for all and hope that all the damage they've done is not irreparable.
1
Frank Bruni, in his survey of the field of Democratic opponents, has listed alienated white men, progressives, women, and nostalgist anti-Trumpists. But he has blindly ignored a 100-year Democratic mainstay, Zionist Jews, that President Trump is not defining. On the contrary, he has been representing us better than the antisemitism-coddling weak Democratic leadership. Needless to say, I don't consider "Zionism" a dirty word; I believe it is the heart and soul of "Judaism," which I don't consider a dirty word either.
Maybe it is; but this shameless pandering, this cheerleading that lets everybody and everything else go down the drain and betrays central values, isn’t one eensy bit more attractive in Zionists than it is in evangelicals.
1
Donald Trump picking the Democrat? I can see the argument. Donald Trump being the center of gravity around which everything revolves? Fine, it's a perceptive point.
But the images Mr. Bruni uses in the final paragraph are so revoltingly vile to me that I can't even discuss them. My mind flashes to the final scene of "Rosemary's Baby".
(Mr. Bruni is not out of line with what he wrote, I'm just sharing my reaction to it.)
2
I usually love Bruni’s comments but this was mailed in. He seems to be being “controversial” but it’s just padded Trump-is-gross. From the Department of Duh. And Dem’s should not be complacent, Trump is hard to beat, and no one knows what strategy will work. More Duh. Now. Discuss amongst y’selves.
1
The question is: Which Democrat will be the best Dr Jekyll to Trump's Mr Hyde?
I will vote for any Democratic nominee in November, 2020, even the non-Democrat Sanders. And I'll be knocking on doors, distributing flyers, and giving money to the nominee. And as to the 22 candidates who don't get the nomination, you all have special & unique supporters who see you as their first Presidential choice. Do your best to get them behind the nominee, support her/him, and vote. You yourself must do everything to show support for the nominee, primarily hitting the campaign trail and very visibly demonstrating the urgent importance of winning in November, 2020. No loser sour grapes (this means you, Bernie bros). And Barack and Michele, the country needs you to hit the campaign trail too.
1
How can any Ummurican believe in democracy after the 2016 election? It's more than apparent that Trump has already won 2020, having subverted the electoral process with pernicious foreign intervention in 2016. We no longer inhabit a free republic but instead continue as a third-world tinpot dictatorship under this insane despot. Don't worry. He'll embroil us in a nuclear conflict before the election and it will all be a moot point...
1
It is interesting to watch this Democrat race. 25 candidates?! Didn’t anyone watch the Republican primary last time? Viable candidates couldn’t get steam — and we are seeing that here. 25 people debating...most aren’t going to waste their time watching these debates when Netflix is available. Most don’t have that kind of attention span.
Will the press “pick” the contenders by deciding who gets more coverage? Or will Trump “pick” his rival by providing that candidate the opportunity for more press coverage?
Some posters suggested that the Democrat candidates not attack each other. That was Bernie’s take with Hillary. Didn’t work well.
I predict NONE of the current 25 will be the nominee. Many of these are spoilers, intended to keep everyone’s numbers low. There is a conspiracy, with some MSM involved. Any Democrat rising in the polls gets attacked. A game of whack-a-mole. Look what they are doing with Biden now.
And watch the convention and the keynote speaker. She’ll be a non-candidate. She’ll give a great TelePrompTer speech. The commentators will fawn over her. “Why couldn’t she be running?” They’ll opine.
A few ballots, no one with steam, and then one of those candidates in on the scheme will throw their support to this woman. The talking heads go crazy. Could it be. What drama. Then another candidate also throws their support to this women. Then another. They are all in on it. Well, most of these nobodies are. Who? I’ll bet Michelle O.
DNA? I don't think so, think that should read stench!
There fixed it.
Great thing about stench; we can all get rid of it with a good shower - in this case throwing the bum in jail.
Democrat candidates painting Trump as pure evil are making a mistake. He may be the world's biggest troll and jerk but to deny his strengths is foolish. You will never win over his supporters by portraying him as Hitler.
For example, his approach to foreign policy, which is the antithesis of W Bush, HRC and the neocons, is a step in the right direction. No longer do we bomb and invade countries, rip down their leaders and then shove our values down their citizens' throats. We are open to talking with our adversaries to see whether we might have mutually beneficial interests. By developing working relationships with them, we have a better chance of changing their behavior over time without bloodshed or bankrupting the treasury.
To deny that the economy is booming is also foolish. Trump's deregulation efforts and focus on jobs has had tremendous positive impact. Minority employment is record high. The stock market is skyrocketing due to the optimism. He is taking on tough challenges like trade imbalances with China.
Other good points: Trump is making good inroads with criminal justice reform. His concerns about the border situation have proven to be right.
Many Trump supporters like his policies but not the man. They also are concerned about the environment. I would suggest that any Democratic candidate should admit Trump's strengths, and then point out his obvious flaws. That's the better way to win them over. Insult them and you lose them.
1
Remember how the 16 Republicans running in the race to be President were referred to by the media as the “Clown Car.”
You never hear the 23 Democrats referred to as the “Clown Car.”
While the term is disrespectful, I first thought the term was the usual contempt of Republicans. While I think this is true, another thought occurred to me. In 2016 , Hillary was thought to be so unbeatable that it was hopeless to even try to run against her. Thus these “clowns “ were too stupid to think they had a chance.
But in 2020 every Democrat believes Trump can never repeat thus every Democrat has to be considered the next President. Therefore they aren’t “clowns “ but must be taken seriously. Therefore, you will never hear the media call the group of 23 Democrats a “clown car.”
Frank, you think this all has to do with Trump? Time to take a good hard look at how the media was complicit in getting Trump elected and now keeps him alive by putting every tweet on the front page. I don’t think Charles Blow has written a column about anything else since 2016, for god’s sake. Look inward. And stop covering him - stop covering him and he loses. He wins because he plays you all so easily.
2
"The opposite of Donald Trump is an Asian man who likes math" - Andrew Yang. Not sure why he didn't merit a mention when he is the only Dem candidate who is directly solving the problem that got Trump elected in the first place - the loss of 4 million factory jobs to automation. Yang is Trump's worst nightmare:
“Oh, I dream of these people every night,” discussing his prospective Democratic opponents in 2020. “The only thing I worry about is that some total unknown that nobody ever heard of comes along.” Donald Trump – September 29th, 2018. So. Yes, Yang.
Three main reasons she lost to the con man.
-Democrats and independents stayed home because they thought there was no way Clinton could lose to this lunatic liar
- Russians and press were against Clinton
- Racists
Democrats will destroy Trump and Senate republicans with impeachment in the House and Democratic Senate candidates holding McConnell and thee other spineless Senators "accountable" for their not guilty votes in the Senate trial.
Speaker Pelosi has a constitutional duty to immediately begin impeachment inquiry . Set House impeachment vote for Sept 4 ,2020 and watch those Republican Senators squirm.
And watch the Senate majority turn to the Democratic party.
Impeach now and then make McConnell, Graham , Collins , Ernst, Gardner, McSally and all thee others up for reelection defend their not guilty vote in the Senate trial to their constituents and hopefully they would be thrown out with Trump.
1
You could elect Jesus Christ him/herself and the outcome will be useless unless the Senate gets flipped.
Absent the above candidate, a Democrat is going to win, but if Mitch wins we will get nothing. Zip. Nada.
2
Stop calling the president the leader of the free world. That wore thin a few years ago.
We are a corrupt plutocractic autocracy. Willian Barr alone represents the fall of our former representative democracy.
2
Just take people to vote. Only way to get that bloated man out of office.
The President 'leader of the free world' ! ! ! ! LOL
A throw back to the Cold War. Americans need to realize that they no longer lead. After decades of 'yankees go home' the world is all too pleased to accept that fact.
1
Bruni forgot Tulsi Gabbard, D HI, who has the best foreign policy.
1
The article ends with "Even if he leaves the White House shortly after November 2020, his DNA will linger." let me add "in jail"
Joe Biden + Amy Klobuchar = 300
Trump's appeal is to the WASPERS (White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, Evangelical Republicans).
Unless we get rid of the GOP dominance of the senate it isn’t going to make a whole lot of difference who is elected president, other than it MUST NOT be the blond beelzebub.
Well folks, I'm a Conservative, so let me clue you in on axactly why you will lose this election, no matter who runs against Trump. And I will try to be respectful, which is a really difficult assignment...you see, we hate you guys every bit as much as you hate us. So here's why...it is beyond your comprehension that you could be wrong...about anything. You are looking to pick your candidate based on race or creed or who they sleep with or what house of worship they attend. America doesn't care (sure, pockets do, but not in general). As a party, you are spending all your collateral on why Trump is terrible, and why you hate him...no one cares what you think about Trump...they want ideas and solutions. If you have any, you've chosen not to share them. So keep believing you're always right, and that having a candidate that is black or gay or muslim, or a midget with "proof" of climate change, is sure to win you the White House...it won't. Because the overarching message all you liberals/Democrats put out, day after day, is "we hate Trump, and America is bad...and if you don't believe exactly what we believe, then YOU'RE bad, too". Please keep doing that, because I want 4 more years of Trump.
1
"..the shadow cast by Trump is bloated beyond measure. He’s not just influencing the Democratic race. He’s perverting it."
You contend that was a unique phenomenon, but in 2016 the inordinate DNC bias to nominate a female politician cast a big shadow that didn't "just influenc[e] the Democratic race," it "pervert[ed] it." And look what we have as a result.
I'm still trying to absorb and deal with the abomination & disgrace that is trump.
1
Gee, no picture of and only one mention (as part of an "also" group) of the guy polls have in second place. Obviously, NYTimes too is trying to pick the Democratic candidate. Quelle surprise.
1
Where’s Bernie in the graphic?
1
While I share some of your thoughts regarding Trump’s effect on the choosing of a Democratic candidate, I think the reasons are even more general than you state: people are looking for leadership. If Trump is the antithesis of what a leader should be (and he is in spades), then a smart, tough, caring candidate who has real plans to stand up for the common person and common good and who is interested in serving rather than self-serving would be the obvious choice. That is why I am enthusiastically supporting, along with a growing chorus, of Elizabeth Warren.
1
Perhaps it is best to view our 4 years with Trump as a return to High School, to remember, or perhaps, just pay attention this time, during American History or Civics class. All the forgotten characters are here too. The ones who could care less, the troubled teens, the teachers who could enlighten, and the ones who would deaden your soul to learning.
The popular, the vulgar. the friendly/unfriendly - perhaps jealousy or envy colored their mood, the bored or bright, sunshiney souls of yesterday, all in a play of our own making.
In Honor of my ninth grade English and language teacher Ms. McDonald,
vivere et discere...
1
Republicans can't say that Trump does not really represent the party's ideals but then not put up someone against him who does.
1
This is true -- great column. But it is equally true that Hillary Clinton picked the huge GOP field and ultimately Donald Trump by enabling her serial-MeToo hubby and helping perfect a artful form of codified corruption.
2
@John Jabo: Somebody else pioneered every form of corruption rampant in the Republican Party today. You have to be bad because someone else is worse.
This is the Second Gilded Age. The 2020 election is the 1896 election and a choice between a government run by, and for, business; or, a government run by, and for, the people. It may appear that there's a ground swell of support for progessive candidates, but I'm keeping a weary eye open for a repeat of 1896 and the solidification of GOP control. At the end of the day, most voters are at least covertly greedy and selfish. If the economy is still growing, expect a Trump win.
I pray I am wrong.
4
Don't forget the Electoral College - what if we wake up in November 2020 and find the Democrat won easily over Trump 54%-46% but lost by another handful of votes in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Florida? This is almost impossible statistically, but it's not actually impossible.
The national polls are encouraging, but the individual states must be our focus. Take nothing for granted. Let's learn from the last disaster.
3
@Frank Roseavelt: Here in the US, states and corporations are people, and people are grist for their mills.
1
As is typical of so many comments on the election, this talks personality to the neglect of issues. In a time of such peril. isn't it about time we focused on the needs of the country and the candidate who offers the clearest and and constructive agenda?
Who speaks of the need for universal health care, which every other major nation has.
The need for a minimum wage of 15$, which currently, in the wealthiest nation in the world, is 7.50$
Stringent control of the wealthy banks, whose irresponsible and reckless behavior helped bring about the debacle of '08.
Free tuition at state colleges, although most European nations offer it in all colleges.
Government sponsored health-care for all.
These ISSUES need to be put forward, and questions of personality and attractiveness left to Hollywood.
3
@JFP: The debacle of 2008 was a liquidity crisis caused by a mountain of derivatives larger than the global economic product becoming payable at the same time. These derivatives were bets on interest rates and loan defaults motivated by the Fed's proclivities to tinker with rates. Credit default swaps were another problem, they should not be payable to parties that don't own the securities to swap. Today they work like buying an insurance policy on your neighbor's house.
Democrats better hope the headline is right. If it is, then the party will pick a candidate who is moderate enough to win. Unfortunately, the headline isn't right: there are enough zealots in the party who would prefer a candidate who is ideologically pure even if he/she can't win the election.
1
@Kent Kraus
Zealots?
I find that concerning!!!
I think there are several million Americans that would be better choices for president than Trump. Our job is to decide which of these 20 or so candidates we think will do the best job as president. That they would do a better job than Trump is obvious.
2
I really have no idea what Frank is talking about. Every Dem I know is really excited about many of our candidates. There are some great ideas out there. That has nothing to do with trump. The only influence trump will have is that I believe Dems will ultimately support whichever candidate is nominated, and will not sit home because we are not happy or excited. So thanks, trump, for uniting our party with one common goal.
4
The Democratic candidate should be a well spoken moderate progressive with integrity.
2
This is a wonderful piece of lucid journalism. Thanks for sorting it all out for us.
I believe Elizabeth Warren is employing your strategy.
Mr. Bruni seems to forget that Trump lost the popular vote by a wide margin and that his victory in the Electoral College was a perversion created by 1) Years of Republican gerrymandering that effectively tilted the election in Trump’s favor, and 2) A successful Russian propaganda campaign that convinced just enough Deplorables to vote for Trump. As far as I’m concerned, the rest is noise created and propagated by the mass media to keep voters glued to the news.
3
@Mark - Agreed. But what about the impact of the 2016 voter turnout nationwide? It was a rather miserable 58% - a 20 year low. It's ironic that the results of that election have created such a firestorm of controversy, hyperbole, media madness, and socio/political division...given that 40% of Americans couldn't care less.The largest, and ostensibly most powerful, states - California, Texas, New York - sent a paltry 52% to the polls. A nation filled with this much apathy deserves whatever mess it gets out of politics.
1
@dean bush: James Comey's ploy with Anthony Weiner's computer spoiled that miserable election beyond redemption. That alone should have required a run-off election.
1
Butteigeig has political instincts close to flawless? Funny, since he’s lost me already. After his impressive CNN Town Hall, I added him to my list of candidates I give money to (which included Warren and Sanders). He impressed me that much. Then I heard he was at huddling behind closed doors with big money Dem establishment donors. Huge mistake. He no longer has my support.
2
@JJ
In the end, the final Democratic candidate will need the support of big donors. I've donated to Mayor Pete, and would be very happy if he were to emerge as the successful candidate.
5
Bernie didn’t need big donors and but for the meddling of the DNC, could have made it. And Warren is not taking money from big donors.
So, no, candidates don’t need to be in service to big money donors anymore. Our elected officials need to serve us and not the oligarchs. Warren and Bernie get this. You don’t. It’s no longer OK for candidates and officials to serve the oligarchs above us. I won’t vote for Pete.
3
Andrew Yang is on the rise and in your alley. See yang2020.com or one of the many 1.5 to 2 hour podcasts with him on YouTube.
What good writing. I am not talking about just the analysis either, sharp as it is. The word choices and the structure of the essay make it a pleasure to read. Thank you.
1
People may genuinely feel that a chance to steer America in the right direction regarding better education, climate change mitigation, human rights, peaceful resolution of world conflict and other forward-looking policies should be jettisoned in favour of getting ANYONE but Trump in.
However, an American-business-as-usual candidate would mean the loss of a huge window of opportunity, also, it would have a devastating effect on the rest of the planet.
There has never been a greater awareness than now, that the smug, "America is the Greatest" ocean liner needs to correct its course, so NOW is the time to go in with an inspiring, competent candidate for genuine change for the better.
If he/she loses and Trump is in for a further 4 or even 10 years, that's what the US deserves. But the rest of us don't.
5
Can a Republican challenge Trump in 2020?
It seems impossible. A sitting president?
Yet it happened. In 1968.
A hero, senator Eugene McCarthy, challenged the powerful president Lyndon Johnson.
Voters in the New Hampshire primary made it clear Johnson was vulnerable. And, like Nixon, he quit - by not running again.
3
Every bad thing is originated from Trump, and the chaos in the field of democratic presidential candidates is surely one of them. So,there is nothing the democrats is responsible for. What an attitude that a party wanting to govern the most powerful country in the world can have!
"He’s warping the lens through which they’re viewed."
I would not say "warped." I think he has instead focussed the lens through which they’re viewed. I think that Democrats are more focussed on policy than in any recent presidential election. We are far less concerned with personality or superficial flaws or minor policy differences.
I hope that through this election cycle, Mr. Bruni writes more about the candidate's policy positions rather than horserace speculation and questionably reasoned electability predictions.
6
Bernie Sanders has been delivering the same message well before Trump. Bernie hasn't moved an inch from his message. If the DNC hadn't fixed the democratic nomination we wouldn't be in this situation. Bernie has been singing the same tune, the tune that everyone is now following - universal medicare, progressive taxation, education for all and an end to lobbyists and to address the corruption in the electoral system in the US. The media have been complicit in black balling Bernie and ignoring him as the vast majority of media organisations are owned by the billionaires that Bernie will tax and limit their political influence. Bernie is the only candidate that has a chance to win in 2020 and he has had no influence by Trump... Feel the Bern!
6
Give it up already. Too old, too ineffective, too divisive. Never Bernie. Not last time, not this time. Ram Bernie down our throats and watch Trump win again.
1
Just for the record, the series Dallas started in 1979 but had most of its run in the 80s. The Dream season was definitely in the 80s.
2
I'm a biologist. Climate Change is an existential threat. We are in the middle of the Sixth Extinction and it will take a revolutionary change in our way of thinking to step back from the edge and work for the greater good in contradiction to our instincts.
An article claiming that Trump will decide on the Democratic Candidate for the Presidency is a hilarious indication that it may be too late to turn back.
9
Yes, trump is trying to twist the trajectory of the Dem race into his own paths of chaos, diversion, and vitriol, but there is a mightier force at play.
Listen to the candidates’ speeches, read their policies, watch their interviews. They’ll each have policies with which you agree, some you don’t. All are more worthy of the Office than trump. But 1 candidate stands out, stands above all the rest, is unfazed by trumperistics blasting out of the Oval Office. Buttigieg.
Pete doesn’t owe a debt to trump. Buttigieg is doing what no other candidate has been able to do, what trump has failed to defuse. Buttigieg innately sees the best in us, speaks to the common good in all of us with a goal to bring Americans closer together again.
At the opposite end of the curve is the candidate who brings out the worst in us. Trump sees and speaks to the worst in human nature. It’s a talent, surely, but it’s too destructive when the results pit brother against brother, American against American.
Frankly, I do not care which Dem candidate is presumed to be “electable” or who is most likely to beat trump.
This may upset many who just want “anyone but trump” to win in 2020. And a big part of me is right on board with that. But in my core, I really don’t want just “anyone but trump.”
I’ll vote for Buttigieg because he wants the future I want, has the brains and humility to lead America down honorable paths that will restore America to a respected global nation, with values I admire.
3
You may want to check out Andrew Yang. The values you seek are embodied in his policies shown on yang2020.com. He may be a little quirky but his grasp of tech and societal change is the best in the bunch. He is gaining momentum and deserves it.
@S L Hart "Pete doesn’t owe a debt to trump."
It's breaking news if you can name one Democratic candidate who does.
So let's all make a call to the news media, and we should all repeat it over and over again, to stop reporting on Trump tweets, trump insults, or other trump outrageous and soon to be reversed actions. They are designed to dominate the news cycle. The press needs to resist them, and the consumers of the press need to absolutely DEMAND that the press resist them.
Right along with reports of mall shootings and other miscellaneous shootings that are not really newsworthy because they are very common and follow similar patterns and do not provide useful news for people living remote to the shooting location.
So much of what the press reports on is lurid but not important. We need to demand better if our democracy is to function. Dear Press, do you need to ruin the country in order get eyeballs? Maybe we don't need that kind of press anymore.
5
Mr Bruni's analysis is incorrect. Only Biden is defined by Trump and his whole purpose there to repudiate Trump. The rest of team actually believes they have something unique offer. Although in a some the case I am not sure what. It is time all but the top five in the polls quit, some of them like Beta are better suited for the Senate.
3
It is fatalistic for the Democratic party to leave it to Donald Trump to pick the Democratic Nominee after 24 candidates have thrown in their hats for being the nominee. 25 months in his presidency of Trump it has been very clear that his hands are tied and he is not the most powerful person in the USA leave alone in the world. All the polls and predictions that if Biden or any of the 2 dozen democratic candidates are the nominee of the democratic party that they will defeat Trump are as useless as those polls in 2016 showing Hillary will win the popular vote and the electoral college.
Take it from this independent private citizen, if the nominee does not identify the problems facing the country and are stuck in a one track goal of preventing Trump from being reelected without proposing some innovative solutions, they can forget stepping into the white house.
Right now there is an epidemic of Democrats with an incurable form of Trump derangement syndrome and they will vote for any Democrat but I doubt whether Independents and Republicans will be impressed with an empty suit or dress. Propose a realistic path to prosperity for all or perish into oblivion.
2
@Girish Kotwal
Each of the candidates in the Dem primary has perspectives about where the country should be heading and ideas they hope will take us at least part way there. We won't find that out from Frank Bruni, though. With 23 primary candidates to build a column around, Bruni chose to write about Donald Trump instead. It's he, not the Democrats, who are being defined by Donald Trump.
Prosperity for all will never happen. There will always be winners and losers in an economy and it will never get much better than what we have now. There will never be enough “good jobs” to go around I. A service based economy.
I'll leave it to the historians to explain why Trump won in 2016. For the Democrats, though, they need to make sure that it doesn't happen again in 2020. They can do that by mobilizing their supporters to vote. This means scouring each state for new ('forgotten') voters much like Doug Jones did in winning the Alabama Senate race in 2017. If the Democrats can do that, they should win next year (and take back the Senate, too).
8
"Did Trump prevail in 2016 because too few young people, progressives and voters of color cast ballots? Then the key is a candidate who can supposedly energize one or more of those groups."
Goodness, I despise people who need to be "energized" before they'll bother showing up to vote.
Just vote, people, whether you're energized or not. Yes, I know: showing up to the polls to vote isn't quite as exciting as attending your favorite rock star's concert, and, on behalf of democracy, I apologize about that. But, just for once, could you try doing the right thing for the sake of our society and country--whether you get a buzz from it or not?
10
My greatest fear is that Trump has lowered our standards and our expectations so far down that they will never revert to normal. Which is why I deem half of the candidates unqualified and others I'm not sure can beat Trump. I like Bennet, Biden, Booker and Warren and I like Buttigieg but he needs more time. Kamala Harris would make a great Attorney General but with no foreign policy experience she isn't ready to be president. Let's keep our standards as high as possible or we will pay for it later.
1
Let’s hope that the memory of this horrific four years of Trump remains fresh for a very long time, as a deterrent to future autocratic aspirants and a reminder that our Democracy is as fragile as our will to stand up and protect it. Vote as if your life depends on it, because it does.
17
@KS All that peace and prosperity has been just been terrible.
I agree with most of what the commentator says. But he missed one major reason there may be so many Democratic contenders this year. Running for, but not being selected, as President has become a major career move. Contenders are almost assured a cabinet post, top government office, book deal, or media commentator deal if they gather enough attention as a candidate. There’s no need to win for big rewards to follow.
3
@Mary Ann Baclawski: It is all scrabbling for gigs on reality TV.
Looks like it's Biden then!
14
Trump's "DNA" is not all that will linger.
It is his stench.
14
Part of the reason there are so many Democratic candidates is that President Obama and the Clintons dominated the party and crowded out any emerging leaders. The same thing will be true for Republicans after Trump is done.
3
@Johnny Orange
Hope not the Republicans have shown no interest in helping any but the top money folk of our country.
Thoughtful and fascinating piece. Yet it is media that is the vital citizen reporter and Trump is their best and most consistent marketing tool ever--paralleling the attention given to war coverages.
One new's outlet reported that auto-workers rejected having union representation by a close vote even though acceptance would avail them higher wages and benefits. Seems odd on its face.
Trump's predominance as the mainstay new's phenonmena is not because of his high public station in the world or even his antics. He's a gossip piece not a new's report. The latter takes time and effort to develop 'The What?, The Why? & The How?' and can be expensive for media services. Everyone has an opinion and that is certainly not news.
Trump's persona as to its attractiveness as a curiosity is no longer of significant new's worthiness. Those individuals, his friends & foes alike and their actions, objectives, causations are daily NEWS events to develop! Their behaviors and conducts as public figures are ripe for public scrutiny and exposure as 'factual' news.
A legitimate news organization excepting a No Comment reply without explanation by a Public Official regarding matters of Public Governance is a dereliction of their public duty under our Constitution to keep the Public informed.
2
@Samuel Owen
Personally I had to examine myself during that exercise I realized I was suffering from Trump Overdose Syndrome (TOS). The main take away of that is Mr Trump has to the center of everything, at first most of the blather he comes out with is amusing in a crass demeaning way but I never liked that method of attention gathering. Some comedians used this method note Mr Don Rickles who frequently told folk their deodorant had failed. That's amusing for only a short time then it becomes an indication of their intelligence not a good look!
In school we (the baby boomers) were taught Critical Thinking and I have used that through out my life it helps to differentiate between outrageous tails and a glimmer of truth. I became somewhat disinterested in Mr Trump and the nonsense he spews out repeatedly then I realized that he is actually covering some nastiness being done to our country so I try to keep up.
I have a hard time with folk who think Mr Trump is out to help them it screams of Snake Oil will cure all ailments.
That's really frightening that anyone buys into it.
We can’t allow trump to treat any opponent, whether it be a republican or democrat, in the same way he ran his campaign in 2016. He should not be allowed to literally stalk people on stage, while criticizing every single thing. As for the democrats, they need to keep a thick skin, and don’t allow trump to puncture it at all during debates, campaigns, or rallies. The less his opponents mention his name, the more it bothers him and gets under HIS skin. He’s the typical grade school bully that picks on EVERYONE unlike him. I’ve always kept in mind that bullies are the way they are because they feel inferior to others, not because they feel superior to them. They’re usually people that aren’t liked by other, and they bully others for attention.
15
She should have swung around fast with her elbows extended. Knocked the bully's teeth out. That would have gotten her elected.
1
The best anti-Trump strategy is televised impeachment hearings. Let the involved players, who testify, draw the pictures of corruption, racism, incompetence, narcissism, etc. for the American public. Then the Democratic candidates can focus on policy issues, and we can start to repair all the damage he has done to our country.
5
@Jose Piesta
The president dominates the media conversations. Televised impeachment inquiries are the only way to wrest that control from him. It will also, in a dramatic fashion, inform the portion of the American public who haven’t been paying attention, not only to the findings of the Mueller Report, but to the actions of this corrupt and authoritarian president.
We realize the Senate will not convict on impeachment, but when Democrats say this up front, the president cannot then claim victory when the Senate doesn’t convict.
Impeachment in the House is merely to apprise the American public of the breadth of his corruption, so we can make an informed choice in the 2020 elections.
Furthermore, senators will have to go on record during his trial, whether to convict him or not. This is especially important for vulnerable senators in Arizona, Maine, and Colorado. An impeachment process, done well, can not only help elect a Democratic president but it can flip the Senate as well.
1
@Jose Pieste. The president dominates the media conversations. Televised impeachment inquiries are the only way to wrest that control from him. It will also, in a dramatic fashion, inform the portion of the American public who haven’t been paying attention, not only to the findings of the Mueller Report, but to the actions of this corrupt and authoritarian president.
We realize the Senate will not convict on impeachment, but when Democrats say this up front, the president cannot then claim victory when the Senate doesn’t convict.
Impeachment in the House is merely to apprise the American public of the breadth of his corruption, so we can make an informed choice in the 2020 elections.
Furthermore, senators will have to go on record during his trial, whether to convict him or not. This is especially important for vulnerable senators in Arizona, Maine, and Colorado. An impeachment process, done well, can not only help elect a Democratic president but it can flip the Senate as well.
Bruni is right that Trump has had an outsized impact on the Democratic primary race; he IS so abhorrent that almost anything and anyone would be worth supporting to dislodge him next year.
That said, there are too many people running for the nomination. As others have written, dislodging McConnell, who is as great a traitor and who has done at least as much lasting damage, is also important. Anyone who does not have a meteoric rise after the debates in two weeks should run for Congress, particularly the Senate. As long as a supine and complicit Senate accedes to every sick whim and lie of this president, this nation remains in peril. We must call out the fact that McConnell won't even bring legislation to the floor of the Senate that would secure the 2020 election and Marsha Blackburn also deserves a call out. We have learned from the Mueller Report how comprehensive and encompassing was the Russian interference. WHY does Mitch McConnell do nothing to stop this? Does Russia have kompromat on him, too??
I have my personal preferences but I will work for anyone in a position to beat Trump...assuming the election is fairly run without interference.
9
Ignore Trump and vote for people who will move America away from its terrible habit of incessant warfare that helps only the military-industrial investors. Stop the control by bankers and corporations. Then put the saved money into rebuilding a crumbling America. Renew our schools, begin to pay teachers and health care workers a decent salary. Recognize that the people who clean toilets do more for our country's health than do the executives who put their waste into the toilets. Make America worthy of our being proud. Stop being bullies. Male ours a decent society.
9
@Che Beauchard
Ignoring Mr Trump is the worst thing we can do. While everyone was looking at this "scandalous behavior" his administration has removed many of the rules and guidelines that were put in place to protect the greatest amount of us. This ranges from the rollback of Environmental Protection to the Department of Education not to mention Consumer Protections. We know that big business (as is indicated by the past) on the overall does not care for the "common folk". If you need to see this just look at how government had to regulate business it's a sorry story but there from the Shirtwaist Factory" fire in MY City to the othe incidents including the Love Canal and many other disgraceful live wrecking messes.
I despair over our species perhaps not really becoming aware to what is happening and that's a real shame.
I am an old man but who is going to help most of us that are not of the top 10%?
I have no real answers but I do have hope.
@Alecfinn
Allow me to suggest that focussing on Mr. Trump is not at all a good thing to do. Instead we should concentrate on what we want to accomplish. Focussing on Mr. Trump only distracts us from the task of thinking about what kind of world we want and what we need to do to get there. We know that Mr. Trump's world is not what we want, Now let's get on with the task of creating the world we do want. Thinking about Mr. Trump is playing his game. Let's not fall into that. Playing his game only falls into his trap.
4
@Che Beauchard
Sen. Sanders, is the only candidate who has voted against Trump's increasing military budget all three years.
https://vetsforbernie.org/2019/04/bernie-sanders-only-candidate-to-vote-against-all-3-trump-military-budgets/
His education plan does just what your looking for.
https://berniesanders.com/a-thurgood-marshall-plan-for-public-education/
Of course, Sen. Sanders trade mark is he stands with and fights for all workers. The (Janitorial Workers) Service Employees International Union SEIU laborers all backed Sanders in the last primary. The management backed Clinton against their wishes.
Bottom tier workers have no stronger voice speaking for them in DC than Sen. Sanders.
www.laborforbernie.org/seiu/
Give the man a look and listen.
NotMeUs
1
If Donald Trump were to read this column (which he won’t), he’d be thrilled. He craves center stage and any kind of attention he can get. Some people have called him thin-skinned, but I think it’s the other way around; he’ll lap up anything as long as it’s about him and then twist the negative press with a lie and a counterpunch. Teflon-skinned is more like it.
Treat him like the toddler throwing a tantrum in the supermarket. The only difference is that he’ll never settle down and cry himself to sleep.
1
While I like Biden and the general "ambience" he creates, I'm left with his eight years as Vice President and what was not accomplished due to republicans blocking everything...
We've seen that just a few republicans can thwart congress entirely and that a lawless president and indeed, republican senate, can thumb their noses at the law, constitution, tradition and the country.
How can Biden do anything different than what was NOT done as VP - where were his negotiating skills, his mastery of bipartisanship then?
Unless Democrats keep the House and take the Senate getting rid of McConnell, we will see the same happen in the next 4 years as we are seeing now, I fear.
I always believed that Biden has the intellect, skills and experience to be a good president... under normal circumstances. These are not normal times with a fraud, a cheat and a liar in the White House.
We need new blood who can excite a new generation to demand republicans join America once again and start working for us, not against us.
It's not Sanders nor Biden I'm afraid... Let's see who rises to the top of the crowd after the debates.
trump is an oaf, an abomination and a disgrace to OUR country. He will not go easy, even if voted out of office, I'm afraid. Watch how he whips up his minors in his rallies and speeches in preparation for this.
We're in for some interesting times and as Bruni says, all because of trump.
5
Trump is a narcissist who relishes division. The best thing politicians and the press can do is ignore his screams for attention. I wish there was a rule that no more than half of the op-eds can even mention DT's name. Dems and the press need to focus on what works and what their agenda is.
Everyone knows who DT is. Everyone.
3
Imposing rules on the media is the start of fascism. Parts of the left have taken on this roll with rioting after the election and attack’s when there are ideas they don’t like.
The 2020 Democratic fields is not that much different in size and tenor from the Republicans in 2016. This style of primary has to do more with news coverage than any one person.
But like the rest of the TImes' staff, Mr Bruni thinks that EVERYTHING bad that happens can be traced back to Trump. It's a disease called Trump Derangement Syndrome.
3
No matter who winds up as Democratic nominee, he or she will be the target of attracts, insults and disparaging words from the Insulter in Chief.
To whomever this person may be, The best strategy is to ignore him, no matter how personal these attacks may be. The mudslinging is all trump can do, or knows how to do. But he’s good at it. So don’t go to his level. As Michelle Obama said, “When they go low we go high.” Don’t let Trump run your campaign for you.
So... Do not respond. Instead, stick to your ideas, your plans, your vision, and how you can begin to correct the damage done by Trump and his acolytes. Otherwise you get dragged down into the gutter. Trump is incapable of even grabbing the curb, so stay up high and talk about what matters.
3
It does not matter who the nominee of the Democrat party is. The only thing that counts is the growth of the economy, GDP. If the economy is growing at a decent rate, Trump wins in 2020.
A decent economy means growth, low unemployment, more consumer spending, etc. Nothing else matters. No one cares about foreign affairs (except trade tariffs and the effects on the American economy).
No one cares about Republican attitudes toward the environment, minority rights, or Trump's history of personal failures.
James Carville said it best many years ago, and it remains true today - "It's the economy, stupid."
4
The most horrifying prospect I've heard voiced thus far is that the DNC is pushing a throwaway candidate into the winner's circle, believing that this election is unwinnable, and helping the other contenders to survive to 2024, without deadly reputation damage and with a few coins left in their coffers. That shocked me, but I wouldn't put it past the DNC. Groupthink is in, after all.
And then I recall that pretty much everyone was surprised on election night, 2016. Absolutely nobody has a clear crystal ball. That's apparent to anybody who understands that data analyzed is just data gathered, sliced, diced and graphed in the paid, professional service of any particular somebody's chosen bias.
Meanwhile, the press and the pundits give Agent Orange way too much credit for foxy intentional strategy, when this indisputably accidental President is just drunkenly lurching from one lilypad to the next, croaking into the swamp, puffing out his chest and hopping from one webbed green foot onto the other, hoping his mating dance will continue to impress the suckers. P.T. Barnum had more class, and better syntax.
Let's all just wait and see what the contenders can show us about winning. Because we haven't seen a winner in Frogville, since 2014, but I think the majority of voters, even in EC states, can still recognize a croaking green loser with flat feet.
2
"with a woman or a member of a minority group" - these are not exclusive categories so the "or" should be "and/or"!
I don’t mind that Trump be hoisted by his own petard.
Poetic justice, surely.
2
It is difficult, if not impossible, to see American politics clearly in the age of Trump. Mr. Bruni is correct, I believe, in his assessment of the impact Trump has had on American politics. It is easy to point out Trump's lying, his venality, his racism and his anti-intellectualism as blots that will forever alter the fabric of American political discourse. But, I believe, Trump is really more effect than cause. Trump is an unpleasant mirror that reflects aspects of our nation that are damning to all of us. Trump is who we are; a society of a few haves and too many have-nots. Trumps amoral and horridly naked ambition reveals a truth about our own moral relativism and the improbability of achieving any semblance of the "Americam dream". Those Trump supporters that Hillary Clinton tagged as deplorables and who welcomed that appellation reveal a group of American's who long ago lost faith in political leaders, and rightly so. Trump, sadly, was right about one thing, America -all of us - has to rededicate ourselves to putting our nation back on a path to the ideal greatness that our Constitution offers. That begins with an unflinching look at who we really are and assessing how far we truly are from who we want to be.
1
@Michael
Mrs Clinton didn't say all of Mr Trumps supporters were deplorables but some made a basket of deplorables.
I didn't like Mrs Clinton or Mr Trump but I thought Mrs Clinton would be a better POTUS.
Cant read past the Buttigieg besotted remarks. The whole premise of this piece is absurd. Much of the inexperience and youthfulness remarks are the same that was held up to Obama and his predecessor GWB.
Every sitting president sets the tone and even the ultimate choice of the opposition party candidate.
Obama most assuredly allowed the racist, gas-lighting and general jerkwad-ness of Trump to rise to the top of the GOP in 2016. The whole Birther nonsense was key in helping Trump gain so much traction out in the land of the racists patriots. Still does!
GWB assuredly set the tone for Obama, and his selection over HRC. The conditions of the man or their Admin were clearly what sparked the Obama brush fire.
So of course Trump is helping decide, and form the basis of the who and what they run on for the Dems.
Bruni makes this sound unique to Trump. Once again the press is giving Trump extra-ordinary powers, when its really the SOP of any election.
Don't believe the hype. Bruni is yet another example of the press unknowingly (?) pimping for Trump.
3
@Boregard
Unfortunately the GOP hated Mr Obama maybe Mr Obama was smarter than they are or were.
And that's a sin for anyone who is not a WASP (White Anglo Protestant) look at their acceptance (when they were in control) of anyone not like them....That's a disgrace on our country. I remember and found many of their ideas and beliefs just stupid.
Just an old man's memories.
It's almost like ordering ice cream in one of those 87, count 'em 87, flavor choice ice cream parlors. (Do they still have those?)
Vanilla remains the best bet. If the Dems win in November next year, it will be the most vanilla candidate: not the whitest, the most vanilla; that would say one that mixes well with most of the electorate.
Meanwhile, with this huge choice of candidates the winner will be able to cherry pick the cabinet.
1
@Joan In California
And yet vanilla frequently improves the taste of many things just read many labels.
2
@Joan In California
And who would be the whipped cream on top?
de Blasio’s the mule or perhaps Judas goat. Keep him in the running as long as possible to stick the trump tweets like a flytrap. Cut a deal, promise him a Cabinet slot or a top 5 Ambassador post.
His value as a pin cushion should not be underestimated by the DNC. This will take pressure of the “real” candidates and give them time to coalesce.
Hizzoner knows how to get under trumps skin like a bunion or boil. Have him tail trump with parallel rallies and get his goat.
3
...the question to me is how does DJT get defeated when his base believe that he is the warrior sent by God to rescue America from its lean into diversity and tolerance...
2
Is it too late for Schwarzenegger to run? If Cruz can run for potus why not Arnold?
It’s not news by any measure that a presidential election is a referendum on the incumbent. This article is of no importance. One big yawn.
4
@KJ
Ummm....No... this needs to be pointed out.
I am more worried about Russia picking the Democratic nominee.
5
In the last election, Bernie set the stage for attacking Clinton. As he ripped her apart, his supporters cheered. When she received the nomination, many refused to support her because she was tainted by Bernie's remarks. The Republicans used Bernie's material, too, often quoting him. Please, please, when you candidates reach the stage, compete on a fair debate level about issues, and don't spend time with invective, tearing each other apart, or you will lose. And so will America.
6
@Daphne
Uh...not quite true remembrance here.
Ms. Clinton did just as much flinging as Sanders.
Her henchman David Brock even apologized afterwards for his lowdown, smears and implications.
By the by...do you not remember how contentious Clinton and Obama was?! You don't remember *Obama Boys*? The same smear and lies campaign as told about the supposed *Bernie Bro's*.
But hey, glad to see your calling our Ms. Warren for her repeated attacks against Biden....oh wait...no, nobody is huh.?! Maybe Hickenlooper and his smears against Sanders...nope. Crickets there too. Hmm....
But sure, Republicans won't have any ammunition to use and just wait for Dems to fling it. C'mon.'
Yes, contentious primary's can get ugly. If our candidates can't stand up to our own hits, how is s/he going to do against the top Republican smear machine?! (of which David Brock used to be. He's the one that took down Bill C. So HRC hired him. He now works for/with the DNC. Go figure.)
Yes, a congenial primary could be, would be nice.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/10/clinton-warrior-david-brock-offers-an-apology-and-his-allegiance-to-bernie-sanders/
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/democratic-bot-network-sally-albright_n_5aa2f548e4b07047bec68023
https://theintercept.com/2016/01/31/the-bernie-bros-narrative-a-cheap-false-campaign-tactic-masquerading-as-journalism-and-social-activism/
1
There are two reasons why the field against Trump is as big as it is; First is that Trump is more vulnerable than any incumbent normally is and second is that being a candidate for the position of President is a positive for those seeking any lower office or a long career in politics.
1
No mention of Elizabeth Warren? She's running on values and ideas which she has held before anyone expected Trump to climb a podium,
4
@cheryl
And I think that's admirable.
The Democratic Party doesn't have a clue either. What we have these days is political cacophony which engenders legislative paralysis.
Who's to blame? Anybody out there remember "Pogo?"
1
@Lake. woebegoner
Many remember the politically astute possum.
1
While i agree with the premise of the article and a lot of the points made in it, i still think it underplays the influence obama’s 2008 campaign has on the “bloat” of the primary field. Obama was unknown to the national political audience until he spoke at kerry’s 2004 convention. He hadn’t even been elected to the Senate at that point. Then, because of the power and charm of that moment, “dreams of my father” became a national bestseller, and from Michelle Obama’s telling, the outside pressure put on him to run was so intense and relentless that he had to choose.
His victory laid down a model for anyone who thinks they have the story and charm to ride to victory, no matter how small their stature on the national stage. Among many, i think mayor pete and beto are banking on this “yes, I can!” model.
5
@Andrew - Mayor Pete, yes. Beto?
That boy's got some growing up to do. No where near in the same league as Pete.
Beto should stick with a Senate run - Cornyn because he very nearly beat "creepy" Teddy Cruz.
1
If not for Vietnam, Lyndon Johnson would be remembered as the greatest Democratic politician since FDR. Why? Because he started his important political life by sending the gift of electricity to his constituents in West Texas. And those folks had relatives and friends all of the state. And those folks had friends and relations in other states—and so on. Dems should ignore Trump and give the people who pull the levers a little genuine hope, backed up with real solutions.
10
@Michael Judge
I've thought about how he would be hammered today because of all the shenanigans applied to get him elected in Texas; he also only got in as Vice Pres. because JFK was forced to consider a candidate who might carry the South.
But he also was a hardcore politician, wielding favor for favor, and willing to twist, and break arms, to get it done. He did a lot of good things, and paid dearly for his support of Vietnam. He didn't plea for cooperation, he made sure he had a way to force other pols to go along.
Could someone like that exist in today's politics?
3
Someone needs to tell the Bernie bros that not only is Bernie not electable; when he's inevitably not nominated, they need to show up at the polls anyway and vote for the Democrat, whoever that might be. (I would never say that on Twitter, btw, because I don't want the Bernie bros attacking me.)
9
Trump's DNA? Yuck!
5
"But the congested field is suffocating qualified aspirants who would otherwise find oxygen." AND it is also removing a lot of otherwise qualified people from this year's Congressional races.
4
The Democratic candidate who has sound political instincts and can initiate a winning campaign strategy when confronting Trump in the general election should be the one chosen in the nominating process. Who can mobilize excitement by being who they are. Someone who's political acumen keeps them from walking into Republican laid traps. Who's own ethical code keeps them from having mini scandals that right-wing media can exploit. Whose own campaign advisers understand the local politics of the interior of the Country and not just on the coasts. Most of all let's please, please, please throw away the campaign play-book where Identity Politics is all or nothing.
5
Let's go with Frank Bruni's (strange at first glance) assertion: Trump will pick the Democratic nominee. A major opportunity comes shortly. After the impending Democratic debates, Trump will tweet and level insults and false assertions at the candidates. Whatever he says will likely receive wide coverage, as usual, and will affect, as it did in the GOP debates in 2016, the public perceptions. Journalists will be eager to get responses from those candidates he attacks. So, Bruni is correct, Trump will very soon begin to pick the Democratic nominee. Or, he will try. How about offering only the bare minimum of attention to him, for a change, and saving most of that "oxygen" for what the candidates, themselves, have to say?
6
The one he tweets the most criticism about, is the one he’s most fearful of losing to. Trump believes he’s the only qualified candidate in the race. I think know who I would choose as a democratic candidate, but what I’d like to know is, who are the republican candidates who are running against Trump. Everyone is concerned about the democrat who’ll run against him, I’m curious about what republican will run against Trump and knock him out of the race altogether. No one seems to talk about that at all.
2
Trump has a style and a policy bent that energizes a large minority of the electorate ; it's just that that minority, unlike most of demographics really VOTES. That is why he is President: given the unlikelihood of eliminating the electoral college any time soon, it could happen again that the majority does not have a consensus that overwhelms the Trump minority. We are also unlikely to see Big Money have less influence on an election, the other Trump success, where his election coffers are filled in part by the very insiders that constitute 'the Swamp'.
For me, a centrist candidate only partly solves the problem: it's not just whether the voters prefer them, it's who actually shows up to vote.
Obama won because he solved this problem: his numbers came more from people showing up, that don't always or even regularly vote, than flipping them from another candidate
5
"Even if [Trump] leaves the White House shortly after November 2020, his DNA will linger."
Stop it. Stop it. Stop it. Stop giving our clown Commander in Chief power over the future. He already has far too much power over the present.
We will survive Trump. We will repudiate his approach to the presidency. We will elect sober, intelligent presidents and Members of Congress who want to govern in the best interests of all Americans.
Trump is not who we are. He can't leave a lasting imprint on our politics unless we let him. So let's not. Let's get him out of office (and, perhaps, into prison) and get on with our Great Experiment. Trump was a dead end. We can do better--and we will.
13
SDTrueman commented here earlier: "There's no older nor more pungent brand of identity politics than appealing to older, angry, white, under-educated, evangelical, anti-abortion, misogynistic men which has been going on at least since the 1950's...."
I very much appreciate the elaboration on this point. Too many times I have seen the boogeyman reduced to simply "older, angry, white ... men." While I cannot deny that I fall into each of those four particular categories, my own anger is reserved for trump and his ilk who have done so much damage to this republic; and I am most definitely NOT "under-educated, evangelical, anti-abortion, and misogynistic."
A few of us FDR/RFK liberals still roam the earth. Thank you, SDTrueman, for not oversimplifying things and tarring all of us older white men with the same brush!
5
this piece does ignore one very obvious point however. One could easily argue that Obama inadvertently brought about trump. Granted that suggests that racism played a part in trump's election. Consider however the number of comments from trump supporters criticizing both Obama and especially Michelle. We are in a period of extremes. Trump is an extreme reaction to the Obama era. Out-of-work whites in the age of a black president possibly followed by a woman?
4
Everyone working for Trump is in permanent disaster containment mode, bend over backwards backtracking mode, denial mode, derangement justification mode, and stone cold cover-up mode, apart from enriching themselves and their puppet masters with (instigating, facilitating, or protecting) outrageous fraud and extortion schemes on stiffer steroids to the detriment of everyone else, especially you and me. It never ends but keeps getting worse and worse.
The list of achievements of the Greed-driven Oligarchic Predators forever ruling us includes the disasters of global warming, pesticidal ecocide, plastic proliferation, the inequality abyss, and collapsing oceans; the rigging of democracy by gerrymandering, voter suppression, and voting machine fraud; domination of what people consume when they watch a screen or hear radio; ubiquitous corporate and other power broker spying (and recording and archiving for retroactive spying) on wherever our minds stroll online; and ads everywhere. Post WWII there have been a string of ugly wars that America started that all turned into disasters, and countless dirty, covert regime changes that have destroyed peace, democracy, and worker rights and conditions all over the globe. The current Secretary of State and former CIA director Pompeo publicly boasted lying and cheating and stealing as American Glory.
What depresses me most in this grand scheme of affairs is that the guy hellbent on keeping the swamp in place is the leader of the Dem pack.
2
Trump won because democrats failed to read the economic and social play (and he did) putting up a candidate who displayed tone deafness about key voters’ problems.
He will be defeated by a candidate who addresses these problems, is not distracted by his antics and who is able to convince America that Trump is nothing more than a joyless angry soul who seeks power as an antidote to his personal inadequacies.
10
(Biden) He said that the cashiers at Target “know more about economics than Trump.” Biden is showing his elitist view of folks who work at places like Target--as he implies that they wouldnt know very much. --and he doesn't even get the assumptions he just made.
5
Hopefully, the American voters will wake up and vote the Republicans out of power. Another four more years of Trump and Republican's dominance , America will be toast.
Hopefully, someone like Elizabeth Warren or Pete Butigieg will be the next President to undo all this lawless nightmare.
7
My preference is for a Harris-Warren ticket to succeed the incumbent. Solid credentials, strong leadership and know what they're discussing.
And I'll support whomever wins the Dem primary.
Where is Sen. Jeff Flake? Where is Sen. Mitt Romney? Where is Gov. Nikki Haley? Where is the sane GOP politician who will run against this madman?
3
Clever, Mr. Bruni, you have deconstructed the difference between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. If I need to learn anything more, I’ll try another pundit.
Mitch McConnell deserves a lot more scrutiny than he gets. He is the canny architect of more power and more wealth to the white, right-wing establishment. If you don't support racism, the deep economic divide of the American people, the failure of public education, financial deregulation and the elimination of clean air/clean water and food safety marshal your energy to get his story told. It's Mitch & Donald & Co., Inc.
3
As Scott Adams is fond of saying on Periscope, if you drain everything out of Trump that makes him successful, you end up with Joe Biden.
3
You give Mr. Trump way too much credit. Get over your focus please. It's too limited. Use more imagination and interpretation.
1
I am listening to Warren on TV and what she says is good, but she has a common voice problem, it's not low enough, and she sounds like a little boy or an old woman. What she says sounds good, though.
3
I feel the same! Her policy points are great, but as soon as she voices them, she sounds unsure of what she wants to say or how to say it. So many times I want to say “get to the point already!”
3
Wondering why only one lone Republican has declared for our 46th presidency? William Weld, same age as Donald Trump, former two-term Governor of Massachusetts, has thrown his lone hat in the G.O.P. ring. Mr. Weld endorsed Barack Hussein Obama for president in 2008. Donald Trump won't pick the Democratic nominee, we the people will. And the chosen one out of the amazing and presidentially qualified field of 23 declared candidates will beat Mr. Trump like the empty drum he is.
4
Uncle Joe for president? Let's see: He has repeatedly been accused of inappropriate behavior towards women. He is appallingly sexist. As recently as Thursday, he told a 13 year old girl's brother that his one job was to "keep the guys away from your sister." He supports the Hyde amendment. Do I need to go on?
He was practically a non-existent vice president. He really should become a non-existent candidate. I would vote for any other of the 23 candidates over Joe Biden. I think America should too.
5
@ClayB He is the darling of Pelosi and the donors.
2
Trump will NOT choose. But Americans' choice will be based, in part, on the spotlight Trump and this administration have shone on what we love and what we hate.
As an American, I'm yearning for integrity, honesty, diplomacy, equality, true strength of character, and deep caring for all the people of our country. That means greedy, lying, misogynistic racists need not apply.
Personally, I'm hoping for a tough, experienced female candidate, one with strengths and qualifications equal to any male candidate, but for whom gender-equality will be a given, not a focus. And because I hope she won't blunder into a war, and will focus on practical matters like infrastructure, health care, etc.
Male or female, they must be bold! Not impetuous, and not overly cautious. And they should speak clearly, in terms that inspire every American.
I'm not sure who I'll vote for yet, but it won't be Joe Biden, who I see as part of the old boys' network. And I hope Trump burns.
3
Anyone aside form Sanders or Warren, and the democrats will have my vote.
-moderate republican rich guy
3
I always come back to the brilliant words shared by First Lady Michelle Obama ; "When they go low we go high."
Democratic candidates, you have got to heed these words and end the rhetoric about stopping donald. He will be his own demise without any help from you. Talk about your definitive plans that address issues that impact our lives.
Talk about your plans to improve our broken educational system both primary and secondary. What are your plans for preparing all our youth for entrance to a secondary education? What are your plans to make a secondary education available and affordable to all our future citizens? Candidates, these youth are our country's future decision makers.
Talk about your plan to offer affordability of good health for everyone. How do you plan on fixing the health of our planet?
And so on and so on.
Please, heed her words for they offer the best chance of a democratic win in 2020. Talk to me, talk to us about your plans of our future.
6
As long as the Democrat candidates ALL support our eventual nominee we should be ok. But I remember how Bernie pulled away voters from Hillary who never came back and voted 3rd party and I put a lot of blame of her defeat on him. We have to pull together and stop pushing the far out progressive agenda, it will never fly.
443
@Mary Dalrymple
Considering how the DNC at Hillary's behest of a "coronation" threw Sanders' 2016 campaign under the bus to begin with, I can't really blame the Sanders folks for leaving having been betrayed of an honest process. And I really think Sanders could have gone toe-to-toe with Trump and may well be the President today if he had been the nominee. In some parallel reality perhaps.
But I think people want an honest primary process, not a "fix" in the works for someone designated ahead of time. That's the best way to keep the Democrats together as well as pull in independents who may be both Obama and Trump voters.
143
@Mary Dalrymple
Your memory is at fault. Bernie pulled no voters from Hillary; instead, he brought out voters who would not otherwise have voted in the primary. Bernie campaigned for Hillary. About 90% of Bernie's primary voters voted for Hillary, which is the usual percentage for a defeated primary candidate. Of course it would have been better if all Bernie voters had voted for Hillary but many of them were people who were desperate, whose concerns were loudly addressed by Bernie and then (lyingly) by Trump but not by Hillary. So take it back.
144
@Patrick I agree with your comment, but we have to remember the information about the rift was obtained illegally and used to divide the party, which was successful.
24
The candidate who gets my vote is the one who vows to return our federal government to one that is defined by checks and balances - the one who espouses nation over party - the one who vows to rid our federal government of mitch mcc type partisanship.
5
If we think this election is about defeating Trump rather than addressing the maladies that made this symptom (Trump and all the other populists in the world) arise, we are on for 4 more years of Trump.
To rebuild a decimated middle class we can no longer have governments chosen by and working for economic powers. If the winners keep on making the rules of the game and the majority of people have no say, we will continue seeing enemies in those who do not look like us, be it immigrants, people of a different sexual orientation, a different religion, etc).
We are in the times were the malaise is reflected by making poor choices. Let’s choose properly as it is likely that the next symptom that will appear will be violence. There are certainly very qualified candidates in the Democratic field as Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, etc. who are decent people and want to address the structural problems that are affecting this great country and the world.
The single best act of patriotism at least 18 Democratic candidates should do is withdraw their candidacy. They need not fear history will judge them poorly if they don’t. Most peopled don’t even know who they are or what they stand for.
5
He won't have any influence over my primary vote because I vote on the issues and which candidate I think I can trust to deliver on those issues. To me, he is just noise, amplified by the news media who should be covering the issues so all of us can get the information we need to vote intelligently.
9
I wrote in a earlier comment that Elizabeth Warren is a National Treasure who shouldn't be wasted on the presidency.
About 8 others agreed (one likely is my retired and wiser older brother who did well financially, has two wonderful kids who are onto meaningful lives. He thinks my idealism and political rage have cost me and my family better circumstances in my early Winter years. But he dutifully looks for my rants and ticks "Recommend" when few others do.)
I think too many offended by a political freak of nature -- Trump -- miss the more important crisis he represents, which isn't just his utterly evil character, but his conflating the Presidency with his pathological need for Lèse-majesté and capricious, unrestrained power.
The Imperial Presidency is the result of a political Heisenberg Principle: the shape of power in a democracy shifts by how we look at it. The weight of recent history -- Obama self-restrained by his deep Constitutional scholarship, Trump unrestrained by infantile temperament, ignorance and denial -- has poisoned the tolerance of ambiguity basic to democracy.
Democracy is a negotiation. With 350 million competing interests in play you need a referee or a negotiator, not a Trump or an anti-Trump. Your agenda is what can work, not what you think should work.
We need a master politician with a wide view lens. A Joan of Arc will get badly burned.
And what rises from the ashes won't be good.
We don't deserve Warren. But Biden deserves us.
10
Well, if we're going on the Anti-Trump line to who the Democratic nominee will be, it's Kamala Harris: highly intelligent yet warm, experience at the state and federal levels of government, & of course, African American & female.
But can she overcome the sexism & racism still so prevalent in American society? (I voted for Obama in the 2008 primaries because he had only 1 thing to overcome: racism. Hilary had 2: sexism & anti-Clintonism.)
We need to ignore those who realistically don't have a chance (at least half of the candidates), & then see a comparison of the 10 (give or take) real contenders' policy stances. Then we can think about things like how much the various -isms are a defining factor or public records (Biden's, for example).
We had 2 good years in this century: 2009-2011 when Obama & the Democrat-controlled Congress got things done (Affordable Care Act, saving the U.S. economy from going off the cliff), but then in 2010 the Republicans retook the House & it's been bad ever since.
When will the American people (those who aren't rich or racists or duped by the religious posturing) realize that the Republican party is destroying this country?
I'm not saying the Democrats are clean as freshly fallen snow, but compared to the Republicans they are saints.
I wish some of the Dem candidates would do want Eugene Robinson suggested in the WPost: run for Senate to try to flip the Senate so McConnell is halted in his contribution to the destruction of democracy.
5
Mr. Bruni, usually I am in complete agreement with your political views, but in this opinion piece, I think you give Trump way too much credit.
It is *Republican* policies and values that are defining the candidacies of many of these people vying for the Democratic Party nomination. Please, we need to focus on the fact that Trump is just the symptom---Republicans and their ruthless disregard for the well being of anyone who isn't a millionaire are the real problem. Trump is merely their carnival barker. The reform policies being put forth by candidates such as Warren and Sanders, along with others, are attempting to show the American electorate that the current system has got to change if they want their lives to improve, and that means getting rid of *Republicans* and not just Trump.
3
Frank, You seem to say Trump is pulling the strings : "Donald Trump will PICK the democratic nominee". I don't think his behavior over the last 2 + years was designed to influence the the choice of the demo candidate for president, Trump was just being Trump. Of course these candidates are reacting to who he is, what he has done.
1
bill Clinton won with massive Get Out the Vote voter registration and voter turnout. His volunteers were at concerts, ballgames, busy intersections, everywhere you looked. Could be 1992 all over again.
@Maureen
Bill Clinton won with 43% of the vote, substantially less than Trump's share. Unfortunately for you, Ross Perot is not running again.
No one (yet) has discovered the magic sauce for effective confrontation of Trump. Jeb tried gravitas, that didn't work. Ted Cruz tried mudslinging, that didn't work. Hillary tried technocratic mastery, that didn't work. Marco Rubio tried mimickry....and so on. What will work is an unscripted messenger who can be nimble, unpredictable and unique the way Trump is, but with the additional persuasive rationality and substance. The nomination process is designed to select a person among twiddle-dees and twiddle-dums. Whether that process can select a candidate to beat a one-of-a-kind incumbent like Trump is a big bet. Our nomination process isn't designed to select an opponent for a mutant, it's designed to select a candidate for a mirror image product, produced buy a nearly identical machine. The nomination process appears perfectly designed to select a candidate Trump can beat. The nomination process needs to be re-designed to allow creativity and authenticity to surface. So far the DNC has shown zero recognition of this fact, trying to control the media, format, litmus test, etc. At this point they seem to be trying to renominate Hillary.
5
Until the Electoral College is abolished, we'll keep getting Republicans in the White House who did not get a majority of the popular vote. (And it's always Republicans who benefit!)
The US Senate is majority Republican for similar reasons. Wyoming with a population of 0.5 Million gets 2 US Senators. California with a population of 40 Million gets 2 US Senators. Does anyone see anything resembling democracy here?!
This arrangement of the anti-democratic Electoral College coupled with the anti-democratic US Senate constitutes a nearly-insurmountable barrier against Dems. Thus, for this reason, and several other reasons (campaign "contributions" that are really legalized bribery, extreme gerrymandering, etc.) , the US is absolutely not a democracy!
The federal government is implementing policies all the time that do not reflect what the overwhelming majority of Americans want! The federal government is controlled by extreme, right-wing conservatives. The Freedom Caucus and Mitch McConnell have blocked the entire Congress for decades!
If we ever want the federal government to be responsive to the will of the majority, the entire political system of the US MUST be changed to make it democratic.
Anybody who claims the US is a democracy has no idea what they are talking about and is simply repeating the pro-US propaganda that they start feeding us all in kindergarten. It's pure propaganda!
It's check mate for the Dems and progressives.
12
I think what's very significant, at least in Frank Bruni perspective, is that circling around Donald Trump in everything and in this U.S. elections, is the irremediable fate that mark the terrible path of decadence the country has engaged for perhaps decades to come.
2
It also feeds into #45’s massive narcissism. In this, the media is an enabler of the first magnitude.
1
What do I know, but all of the candidates I'm looking forward to hearing in the debates are on the first night. It was a mistake for planners to think that Biden and Bernie are the big draws, but that's not my problem. I also don't think Trump will get to the election, I think Bill Weld will beat him in the primaries. If Trump does make it to the debates against say Warren, he will come out , shake her hand and say, "Hi Pocahontas" to throw her off. I hope she is prepared for that moment. My prediction is that Warren, Klobuchar, Harris, and maybe Castro, Beto will come out on top of the debates and they will all want to pick Buttigieg for VP. A tip to all is everyone wear their really tall shoes in the debate :-)
1
When the incumbent is up for re-election, the election is a referendum on the incumbent. This is not new.
3
I wonder what might happen if the President is ignored totally by the media for about a month. What if no one pays any attention to what he says or what he tweets? The President loves the attention the media provides; he grows in that attention even when his poll numbers remain flat and restrained – what if that space is denied to the President?
If the democratic party contenders ignore the President during their debates and focus strictly on issues - ignoring him as if what he says from now on does not really count any more – would Mr. Trump continue to be an election issue? If each candidate truly takes the position that it really does not matter what he thinks since Mr. Trump is going to lose the election regardless of who percolates as the DNC candidate finally, might the President find it claustrophobic?
5
I ask but one thing. When it's over for a candidate, accept defeat gracefully and exit the stage. No long goodbyes or hanging on when it is clear you cannot win. Though Hilary Clinton was a flawed candidate, Sander's did her no favors with his inability to leave the primary when it was clear he simply didn't have the votes, and endorse her. He left her injured and vulnerable. I am glad to see a large and diverse field, but I hope that when it's over for each candidate, they exit, and exit quickly.
14
@j If that were true then Barrack Obama would have been "injured and vulnerable" when Hillary hung on to her race against him long after it "was clear (s)he simply didn't have the votes." Face it, she was a terrible candidate.
Why her party thought it was a good idea to run someone who couldn't win her own primary without cheating is the real question. Oh right, it was her turn.
1
For this reason,Bernie should be in the trash can.
1
@Kathleen
Regardless of previous elections - once we have a winner, it's important for all of us to get in line. This was true in the past and it's true now.
Wise politicians will work with the competition within their own party to winnow down the field sooner rather than later. But that may be too much to hope. If left at this count too long, the DNC will have more control on who wins and, judging from last time, it may not be the best path.
2
Is it so bad that democratic contenders have adapted their politics for this moment? After all, its not just about Trump, but about the people who fell hard and voted for him.
3
"He [Trump] attacks the American speaker of the House.”
And that Speaker viciously and regularly attacks Trump. Has Biden ever criticized Pelosi for those attacks?
Biden and other Democratic candidates are riding high these days because the real campaign is still over a year away. Most of their attacks essentially go unanswered. Wait till Trump and his surrogates fight back for real, and unleash the factual ammunition that is building and remains in storage - for now.
2
Would that be "alternative" factual ammunition maybe? Perhaps supplied by the Russians?
Citizen, please. Trump.leaves no attack unanswered ever. Check his Twitter feed and juvenile nicknames.
This article gets so much about this election wrong. Bloated ballots are a sign of the times. In 2016, the GOP had 16 contenders, even though Jeb was the presumptive favorite for the nomination and Hillary the presumptive winner. I doubt we'll even see another election without this many candidates vying for at least one of the nominations. And if any one person is responsible for this year's outpouring, it's Hillary. The presumptiveness of her victory kept most out of the election, including current candidates Biden and Warren. Here inability to read the tea leaves of current voters left the door open to not only Trump, but Bernie who went from nonentity to powerhouse by making her work for it. But where were the exciting up and comers last time? They all stayed home because Hillary had been declared the winner. And when it came time to choose a running mate, she chose a rather dull moderate. All of this would have been fine had she won, but when she lost, she left behind no real bench. As for Trump picking the nominee, no, but we will as a group pick the nominee we think can beat him, and that's pretty typical too.
2
Whichever primary candidate secures the nomination, all of the others should pledge to go out and campaign on his/her behalf, vigorously, until the polls close on November 3, 2020.
15
Forget Trump and get down to the business of governing with a clear policy rather than shooting from the hip. All the Democrats would be better than Trump. The question is which one is best for the country.
Within my own local Democratic Party group, I have said the same thing. People know what the Republicans here stand for: poor schools, poor infrastructure, little if any safety net, etc. What they need to hear is what we stand for.
4
I think the key here is the undercard, better known as the Vice Presidential candidate. Where would we be if Sanders had been Clinton's running mate instead of Tim Kaine. Give me Biden and Warren and see what happens.
8
Trump won because Hillary was such a gosh awful candidate. She represented the status quo, had an outsized sense of entitlement, kept herself in a bubble, and let her campaign staff give new meaning to the word dysfunctional. Now the Democrats might give us Hillary redux in the uninspiring but in his own mind entitled Joe Biden.
8
@Joey: Trump won because of the Electoral College, and because he did two things Hillary didn't; he went to states she didn't; he knew how to use his perceived image as a hard-working, successful businessman who has more money than God; playing off his TV image as an outsider who could fix what was wrong in Washington; and pandering to those who were as naive and gullible, as they were "forgotten."
Yet, despite the sad, inconvenient truth that he is woefully incompetent, his willfully ignorant base, still believes he's the greatest POTUS ever.
While we'll never really know how Hillary Clinton would have been as POTUS (speculate to your heart's content; there is no proof either way), the other sad fact, is that we had two equally lousy choices.
@joey
On one level, you've identified the single characteristic that I believe determined 2016 and will determine 2020. Beyond issues, party loyalties and even identity factions, the race is still a beauty contest - and Hillary's likability then is no match for Joe's now. She came across as a cold, inauthentic fish. Some pulled the lever for her anyway, but some didn't feel impassioned, thought their vote wasn't needed, and stayed home. 2020 is a different kettle of fins. The country has battle fatigue, not ennui.
Agent Orange's venality has sharpened our taste for warm hugs like no previous politician. Joe's got 'em, in spades. Even with a straightjacket on his lip, his personality, honesty and regular guy vibe will shine through. With a balancing younger, wonky (or even woke) mate, it will be enough to win hearts, I think. And get out the reluctant, skeptical and otherwise lazy voter. Everyone is tired of the drama. Too much winning, hah! We want a glass of warm milk and perchance a few cookies. Bring on the boredom.
In a candidate field this deep, broad and wide God will play dice with the universe, contradicting Einstein. Ultimately, chance will pick the Democratic nominee. Trump might as well be a halibut.
That’s because it’s war, the weapons wisdom and wit. As Julius Caesar, no stranger to it, said about it: “success in war is mostly chance”.
He also observed that people “willingly believe what they wish to believe”, which pretty-well sums up the Trump phenomenon.
6
Let's hope these upcoming 'debates' are not Trump-centric. There is so much substance that he isn't capable of addressing that almost any Dem candidate should be able to elaborate a vision and strategy without even mentioning Trump. He is a cipher in the world of 'policy,' and the media's coverage, though negative, is saturated with insignificance.
6
I have decided to ignore the primary until the field has narrowed. Right now the primary is little more than a bad joke, a farce, the first month of a new reality series. It is repulsive.
3
I think a lot of people also long for actual policy details. We want to know what the candidates propose to do beyond sound bites. Part of what we see now is was was lacking in 2016, not just from Trump but from democrats and the news coverage. I don’t care about Trump, I care about our country.
5
@NKM
Yes, NKM. You are so correct that mic of the public is starved for actual policies and achievable visions!
4
I have a favorite, though I like them all more or less.
I ask only one thing of those now running: debate issues and policy as fiercely as you want, but DO NOT attack your fellow Dems. Every time you do is ammunition for the other side come Nov. 2020.
361
@Marty You mean like DJT didn't attack his fellow Republican primary candidates? No Democrat would do what he did, but holding up an opponent's voting record is a part of fair debate.
10
@abigail49 - There's a big difference: due to the electoral college and gerrymandering, Democrats are structurally at a disadvantage in every national race. They have to win an estimated 8%-or-so more of the popular vote to overcome those disadvantages. So it is of more paramount importance for Democrats to stick together behind one candidate. As demonstrated clearly in 2016, if just a few voters in just the right states sit out the vote, or vote Green, it can cost us the election despite overwhelmingly winning the popular vote.
In other words, Donald Trump can win despite a fractured GOP electorate. Democrats can't.
So if you slander a Democratic candidate during the primary season, and you convince just a few people that that candidate would be a terrible president, and those people convince a few more people in just the right states, and that candidate then becomes the Democratic nominee? You may've just helped sown the seeds of Trump's victory.
What Marty suggests goes for us as Democratic voters, as well as for the candidates. There is NO UPSIDE to slandering Democratic candidates you don't support. There is CONSDIERABLE potential downside. Tell me why your favorite candidate is great — NOT why the other candidates are awful.
48
@RGT Every Democrat I have ever spoken to about this issue has said they will vote for whomever appears as the nominee. Like me, the will be holding their noses if it is someone not of our choosing, but we will vote for that person anyway. No question, because of the 23 vying for that position, each of them is better than the current White House occupant.
10
To the authors closing line: Trump will linger, yes, but as a deep burn lingers. Something bad that we cannot forget.
5
The scar is going to be really ugly.
With something close to a 90% Republican approval rating, no other Republican candidate has even a remote shot at beating him for the nomination, which is why Kasich declined to enter and former-Gov Weld stands alone, mostly on ideological grounds.
No, it's Trump vs ... one of the 23
Biden? Most centrist of the leftist mob, but being pulled HARD left. Biggest issue (other than age) is that he has 40 years of a public record that Trump and the GOP will pick apart - crime bill? secure fencing? Obamacare? Trump will kill him with the issues.
Sanders? The election will be a referendum on socialism. Plain and simple. "Make America Venezuela" will be the GOP message. The vocal leftist activists will make a stink to no avail and Trump will trounce in the general.
Warren, Harris, Booker, Mayor Pete? Sure why not. Like Sanders, Trump will paint each as crazy socialists looking to eliminate personal freedoms and redistribute wealth from those that earned it to the undeserving masses, including illegal immigrants. Will NOT play well in Wisconsin, Michigan and other blue-collar strongholds.
In short, even though the polls show Trump behind pretty much all the Democrats, once the campaign hits high gear, the Democrats will have problems. They can point to Trump's personality, lack of truthfulness and morality and make the case anyone is better. The GOP will point to policies and economics to make their case.
Form vs. function. Lets see who wins...
4
Trump has done nothing to improve my life one whit. In fact, I'm poorer in real dollars than before he took office. So...I'd vote for a dog before I would EVER vote for him. At least a dog i can be pleasant company.
1
I think it will still come down to the big names plus 1.
Biden
Buttigieg (+1)
Bernie (of course)
Elizabeth &
Kamala
2
Trump’s DNA lingering in the White House. Did you really have to ruin my day like that Frank?
3
DNA? What about the stench he will leave.
1
What I find stunning about this column is the author's insistence on categorizing candidates by their race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, social/economic class (Bush "blue bloods") -- everything but their ideas.
Actually, one reason Trump won in 2016 is that people are sick and tired of being categorized through identity politics.
We should be categorized (judged), as Martin Luther King Jr said, by the content of our character, not by the color of our skin, etc.
89
@Paco
Trump won through identity politics. His overt and dog whistle commentary hit the mark accurately every time, hence the "oh, he's so refreshing" responses. Trump was not hailed by David Duke and Richard Spencer because he was a real estate guy from NY. Come on now.
25
@Paco. You are absolutely right. MLK was right and Lady Bird Johnson also knew that identity politics would ruin the country. If we had all listened to the candidates and their policies and ideas we never would have had Trump as a republican candidate. So what we all, Democrats and Republicans need to do in 2020 is to listen to the candidates policies.
1
@Paco
That will happen as soon as White people, especially White Men, let go of their identity politics. As soon as they (we) can stop having to be at the top of the heap because we "chose" light-skinned parents, everyone else can stop being categorized through identity politics.
10
The candidate who begins by saying something like this could win:
“This election isn’t about Donald J. Trump; this election is about us, all of us, the American people. For too long, we’ve been divided against each other; as President Abraham Lincoln stated, “A house divided against itself, cannot stand.…”.
Deprive Trump. That should be a bumper sticker.
591
@BlueMountainMan we will continue to be divided. There are real, significant and deep differences between Americans about the role and nature of government, about the distribution of power and economic resources, about the kind of country we want to be.
Glossing over all that with "we all want a good education for our kids" might sound right, but it's simply not true to say that we all have a set of basic things in common. Even when it comes to educating our kids, Americans don't agree on what "good" means, let alone how to achieve it.
Politics can be an ugly game. Sometimes it really is all about getting a lot of people to vote for you, and doing stuff that makes the country more the way you want it to be. Not fixing the "divide", but actually using power to change it. The Republican party has understood this for a long time, and I only hope that the Democrats start understanding it soon.
34
@BlueMountainMan
Pete Buttigieg is saying this exact thing. He's not laying it out so baldly but this is why he should win. Because he wants to unite this country once again and be a President for everyone.
11
@BlueMountainMan
I agree with you AND Trump was elected and I fear he stands a good chance of re-election. Our electoral system is rigged (electoral college anyone?). My partner just told me they won't vote because it doesn't matter. This is here we stand now.
6
The illustration by Ben Wiseman — yet another example of how the NY Times renders Bernie Sanders invisible, not reflecting his actual stature in the race, same as it did in 2016.
1
Trump is a brutal lunatic. How many millions have died? Why haven’t righteous Democrats impeached? Has trump ordered them not to? What about Barr?
@Fred Exactly, who are the millions who died?
Republicans need someone else to thing about. Bill Weld, former MA Gov is very quick, smart, thoughtful, and productive. He's had experience in Washington, was reelected overwhelmingly with over 70% of the vote...both parties loved him. He's respectful of others and calls people by their names. He can handle jerks well.
2
I have my personal pick for the 2020 Democratic nomination, but it's irrelevant at this point. I will vote enthusiastically for whoever gets the nod. Any of them. And every Democrat on that stage on the first debates needs to make it crystal clear: if he/she is not the nominee, his/her supporters should without question campaign for and vote for whoever the nominee is.
No more sullen Bernie Bros. We simply don't have that luxury.
13
Warren is an expert on policy, Harris leans more toward the details of governing. buy this clearly living in the past. mayor Pete is cleared on principles and ethics. with his exception, it's hard for me to put a white male in the top tier of the race right now.
What I do hope is that whatever Democrat is nominated and wins will put many of these candidates in positions in the cabinet. Mayor Pete would be great at HHS, or Harris as Attorney General, Hickenlooper or Bullock for the lnterior immediately leap out.
That said, our columnist misdirects. The focus is on policy, governance, constitutional principles and liberties. A glazed donut could beat Donald Trump.
4
@walterrhett
Being linguistically adept Mayor Pete would make a great
could be an excellent choice for Secretary of State.
At this point, a ham sandwich ought to be able to beat Trump. Enough with this overwrought electability fad with voters vainly presupposing they have the laser analysis of an omniscient political strategist. How about we vote for the ham sandwich with the most visionary ideas for attacking the tsunami of challenges we’re facing?
4
The Democrats themselves "are responsible for the bloat, tenor and dynamics of the party’s primary"!!! Trump may put things in motion whenever and wherever he can, but they don't have to follow his lead.
If Biden makes the cut, Republicans will drag out everything that sank him in his previous two runs: Plagiarism, supporting the Iraq war, being in bed with big banking, being anti-abortion before he got all woke; and that's the tip of iceberg.
Finally, being a creepy old white guy (he'll be 78 in 2020) who gropes women and children (stand by for endless ads with a montage of him with his hands all over different women) will be the coup de grâce .
No wonder Trump is all for Biden.
4
"But his greatest debt of gratitude goes to Donald Trump."
And Trump's greatest debt of gratitude goes to Barack Obama.
8 years of Obama doing so little for the 99% and so much for the 1% is what made Trump possible.
And guess what, Obama's greatest debt of gratitude goes to George W. Bush.
8 years of Bush is what made the election of a Black Man with a Muslim Name even remotely possible.
So the cycle continues. Nothing new here.
3
@GeoJaneiro: McConnell stifled Obama. Don't you wonder how such a nothingburger of a man got so powerful?
1
Please, Democrats:
While you fight for the White House, don’t forget to strenuously try to win the Seante!
6
With so many Democrats running for the nomination, I keep reminding myself I can't "let perfection be the enemy of the good." In short, no matter which candidate gets the nomination and runs against Trump, he or she has my vote.
3
True, but this is a development not to be lamented. My biggest question is, if the country does repudiate Trump in 2020, how fast will the correction be? Will the demoralized former stalwarts of the EPA, Interior, and Energy return to public service ready to resume their work serving the public trust? Will it be too late for re-embracing the Paris climate accords to matter? For American leadership to once again counter jingoistic nationalism in all the places where Trump has encouraged it?
It's only right that the Democratic candidates are defining themselves and their missions in opposition to the current administration's murderous, planet-wrecking actions and initiatives. Voters need to evaluate their chances of 1) beating Trump and 2) putting us ALL on back on a path to...survival.
We will need a lot of debates, a lot of opportunities to hear these candidates talk to each other and to us about the way forward. And as they start to fall out of the pack (as they had better, 23 is indeed too many), I hope those who drop out will stay in the conversation. We are going to need everyone's ongoing commitment and best judgment about how to turn this around.
3
Whoever the Democratic nominee is has to do more than just be untrump. What will the policies be? Lay them out in a convincing manner. Hillary was never really able to do that. Simply saying you will continue the policies already in place isn’t enough. I also think, assuming a Democrat wins, he or she will have to spend much of their time reversing the damage that trump has inflicted on the country and the world.
1
All the attacks against Biden as being sleepy, dopey, out of touch, a Democratic Jeb Bush, etc. etc., have to be most pleasing to Trump. I guarantee you he doesn't want to run against Biden.
1
Whether or not you believe that The New York Times has an ideological prejudice against Bernie Sanders, the illustration accompanying this article is clear evidence of unfair omission. Sanders is currently either ahead of or tied with Warren, who is depicted standing out in front, but he is nowhere to be seen in the image. And while Harris and Buttigieg are far behind him in recent polls, they are depicted at the same scale as Biden while Sanders, again, is not included. At least Bruni's column mentions him, albeit briefly in list form. There is no justification for the Times to publish such an image that fails to include the second-most popular democratic candidate in the race – especially since he has become one of the most famous and influential figures in contemporary American politics. Is this just a mistake? Or is it more likely a problematic symptom, or, even more disturbingly, an indefensible decision?
1
@Respondent Good catch.
Not a single mention in Bruni's article of the one Democratic candidate most capable of defeating Trump: Tulsi Gabbard. She checks off the liberal social issues that Dems care about, but is insufficiently hawkish for the democrat neoliberal establishment. Or as they like to put it "She's a Putin/Assad toady - whatever a toady is." (Bari Weiss)
2
@IskaWaran
Thanks for mentioning Tulsi Gabbard. She is different then most Dems. I think she will make her mark at the debates.
23 candidates and more will throw their hat into the ring means Superdelegates will be picking the Democratic Nominee. Not on the First Ballot obviously but First Ballot has no chance of choosing the Nominee and it will ultimately be decided by Superdelegates.
1
First of all there really aren’t 23 candidates. There are six or seven serious candidates. The rest are interviewing for jobs, elected (VP, Congress) or appointed (cabinet). It’s really a great group with lots of talent.
1
Frank as both a journalist and pundit you may be too close to this issue. My choice of candidate in the end will have little to do with trump and more to do with the Republican Party in general and the last 40 years of policies that have destroyed the middle class. So far Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are the two candidates that seem to have formulated plans. The rest is just noise so far. I'm looking for substance not celebrity.
5
Today's blinding flash of duh: the election will boil down to either Trump or some alternative to Trump.
Trump is certainly an outsized figure in our politics and media. But is what's happening with this year's Democrats really much different from what happens every time the opposing party gets set to challenge a president's re-election?
1
Whoever the Democrats end up nominating, my deepest hope is that all the other candidates will rally around that person and bring their supporters on board, agreeing to disagree and agreeing that something matters more than their disagreements - the future of this nation and this planet.
10
The "congested field is suffocating qualified aspirants who would otherwise find oxygen".
This is what happened to the GOP in 2015-2016 when looking for a counter to Hillary Clinton. We ended up with Donald Trump. He is controlling the narrative, and the media let him do it.
Let's let the qualified aspirants from either party control more of the narrative by having the media pay more attention to them instead of Donald Trump. Stop paying so much attention to the tantruming child in the other room. I already know enough about Donald Trump. I want to know more about the other candidates.
8
A follow-up to my earlier comment: I would break down the candidates into two different groups from Frank, depending more on when they decided to run, and that progression reveals something disturbing. The first round of announcements was a diverse group of people with more name recognition -- Warren, Gillibrand, Booker, Harris, Sanders. The second round was people with little name recognition but two things in common: they're all white males, and either centrists or one-issue candidates. Somewhere at the back of their minds, I suspect, Ryan, Bullock, Hickenlooper, Inslee, Swalwell, etc all think a woman and/or minority candidate can't get elected, and that's why they've all been falling over themselves to get in the ring.
1
I agree that opposition to everything Trump stands for, as a person and a politician, is adding urgency to this campaign that we haven't seen in my lifetime (ie, since just after Watergate). But just because all these people have thrown their hats in the ring doesn't mean they're actually going to rise to the top of the heap. The candidates who ARE emerging at the top of the heap are largely the ones we'd expect to do so, ie the ones who already had national presence before this cycle -- Biden, Sanders, Warren. Buttigieg is an exception, but it's not all that out of the ordinary for a young, brilliant go-getter with an unorthodox background to seize the Democratic imagination -- anybody remember a guy named Barack Obama?
4
Who else thinks Trump will find some excuse -- another "national emergency," perhaps -- to call off the 2020 election if he doesn't think he'll "win" it?
Who thinks Trump will leave the White House peacefully "shortly after November 2020" (actually almost three months later), without cooking up some pretext for declaring the election invalid if the results aren't to his liking?
Inconceivable, you say. But wasn't Trump as President inconceivable?
We need some other way to get rid of him. Could the Constitution offer a way out?
5
@George Moody
You are getting Trump confused with someone who planned and dreamt their whole life to become the President, maybe even the first Female one. He had a nice life before, didn't even think he would win and has no qualm going back to his very nice life after if he loses. I won't even vote for Ivanka unless she does big things for at least 12 years after her Dad leaves office I have appetite for someone being in the Oval Office if the voters didn't put him there. Just like I have no appetite for trying to remove a President who the Voters did choose.
1
Not really buying the premise of this, Frank. Sure Trump serves as a stark, even outrageous, contrast which the Dem candidates can play off of, but as an independent voter, Trump is not factoring into my winnowing process of the Dem candidates at all.
The large pool of Dem candidates is healthy for the country -- ideas are flying around, people are engaged, and there may even be some folks pondering how this really affects their lives.
I don't have a vote in this primary, so I don't have a say in who the Dem candidate will be, but I am thoroughly enjoying (and have sent money to) Mayor Pete & Andrew Yang so far. I want more voices like these two in US politics!
Let the debates begin!
4
Good column but with wrong conclusions (except the last sentence) – it’s all about ego trips.
Sometimes the people is longing for a leader but that leader does not exists – other times the leader is right there but the people are not ready for him/her.
History is fascinating – USA has had some luck with presidents. 2016 was a bad year. 2020 can be worse.
It seems as a conclusion has been reached: that the influence of Right Wing activists will continue had it has done in Europe, and stay front lined in the future. However there is a solution to this exponentially growing faction. Education. If we are able to convince people that certain media are trustworthy, and right their belief that "anyone who opposes or says negative things about Trump is fake news" maybe we'll change their minds. The presidential election and the future of the country are beholden on if the media acts to decrease their bias and inform, not interpret. The safety and overall sustainability of our nation depends on if we are able to accomplish this.
2
We keep enabling President Trump to continue his behavior by giving him exactly what he wants: press saturated with his name. We keep him in the spotlight and he rewards us with sensationalism. The only way to curb an addict's behavior - and save ourselves in the process - is to stop giving him what he wants. What if he received no press coverage? What if no one showed up for his press conferences? What if Twitter shut down his feed?
4
@Alaina Darr I have always said, there is a lot of real news not being covered, or if covered, buried where few will see it, eg., the actual legislation the House Democrats have passed. Just because their bills are DOA in Coroner Mitch McConnell's morgue doesn't mean they never lived and shouldn't be covered, analyzed, debated. Healthcare is a live issue. Just because Trump hasn't come out with his perfect plan doesn't mean Democrats aren't working on it, either to improve the ACA or craft a universal, single-payer plan. And so on. It is Trump's tweets and helicopter trash talk, not the substantive legislation Democrats are doing, that should be relegated to the bottom of the page or left on the cutting room floor.
2
The largest body in the political world is indeed exerting more gravitational pull on Democrats. But the zeitgeist has changed, and no amount of nostalgia or sentiment about the way it was will take the country, or the world, backwards. The large field of Demos seems to be a reflection of the current climate of chaos and inconsistent values and governing priorities of the ruling class.
3
Agree with him or not, love him or hate him, it is hard to argue that Donald Trump is not the best politician any of us have ever seen. Never before has anyone ever owned both parties, and politics in general like Donald Trump does today.
2
Frank, I usually agree with you, but this piece is too pessimistic. Yes, there are a plethora of candidates, but remember that we are more than a year away from the convention, and haven't even had the first debate yet. My own prediction is that there will be a narrowing of options and by Thanksgiving (chosen as a target because I wish to give thanks), we'll be down to half a dozen good people, all of whom will be on record as fully supporting the winner amongst them. Let us then choose based on positions, ability to articulate the positions clearly, experience in leadership, and a history of decisive accomplishment.
5
Frank, you are saying essentially that all things bad that represent the Trump presidency have built the vehicle being driven the Democratic candidates. Of course! That assumption is simple and easily reached.
I agree with the many readers who see Warren as a good choice. She has many excellent ideas and knows how to express herself. She is 50% of what the Democratic leadership requires. Thereafter, however, I am still looking.
Joe and Bernie are not the answer I seek but as long as Bernie stays in the race, he is divisive and therefore very dangerous: a good man with "socialistic" ideas that are costly and not easily inserted into the American political way of life. On the other hand, Joe Biden hasn't firmed up his platform other than to offer a verbal challenge to the Trump mouth. There has to be more.
I hope America listens carefully to the debates coming up later this month. They will be our party's opening salvo.
4
So the current candidates are responding to and reflecting the politics of the Trump era. And? You expect them to be responding to Calvin Coolidge?
4
This is too much like your mentor Frank Rich style of commentary that repetition is a liberals best friend.
The sheer number of candidates is more a symbol of the ego of the elite, rather than a response to The President.
Bruni seems to write off the Trump victory as a response to a woman running or the previous office held by a black man. It wasn't, it was their aggressive progressive policies that left many in America far behind, not allowing those changes to be absorbed by half the populace. Addressing social issues rather than global strategic issues did them in.
The three references to attacks made by the President were all responses to earlier attacks on him.
Bruni sites failure to drain the swamp, because not only the Dem's are entrenched in the lobbying and corrupt system of influence, but many Republicans as well, saw the gravy train threatened and refused to give an inch to their constituents.
Preferring yesterday to today? That can be answered by gaining back the power conceded by previous administration that begged for consensus instead of leading as the US has for a Century.
You seem to forget the ABB, anybody but Bush, campaign by the Dem's in 2008.
Sure President Trump's DNA will remain, and rightfully so.
Frank, go back to food columns, you were better at that.
3
I think a Biden-Warren ticket would be incredibly well balanced. Plus it would preserve Warren's valuable voice in the Senate, as its presiding officer and tie-breaker.
3
Let's ignore the hyper-analysis of Trump and just get out and vote for the best candidate the one that like Obama inspires a huge turnout among those that don't always vote. The best defense is a good offense. The three candidates that can drive the largest turnout are Warren, Mayor Pete, and Kamala. Warren & Pete would be a dream ticket. Joe Biden may pick off a few Trump voters but he won't inspire nearly as many young voters. Playing defense with Trump is a losing strategy, play offense, inspire the demographics that are growing that represent the future.
7
This was a disastrously reductive article. Instead of wasting column inches with single-phrase generalizations of five candidates at once, why don't serious journalists focus on the real accomplishments, failures, and proposals of the candidates.
The strong undercurrent of this article is that "Trump is driving the democratic party more towards identity politics; also, identity politics are lowly and illogical." Wrong. THIS article pushes a narrative that the Democrats and liberals are all about identity politics when the reality is that many are making nuanced appeals to voters (some more complex than others).
People are tired of this beltway baloney written from an armchair angled towards a computer with the NYT and WaPo opinon pages on it, and two or three TVs running the cable news loop. An article like this does not require one to actually conduct "journalistic work" - which many other NYT reporters (and opinion writers) do - by which I mean interviewing voters, talking with candidates and their staffs, and reading policy proposals.
3
I would have expected a more nuanced analysis from the NYT. The best candidate to talk to embittered and economically vulnerable white men in the Rust Belt and flyover country is Elizabeth Warren.
4
Ever since the currant occupant of our Nation’s Oval Office sat down at the desk, everything, everywhere has been squeezed through the cheesecloth of Trump. Everything.
3
"Donald Trump Will Pick the Democratic Nominee"
But isn't it always so that the incumbent essentially picks the opposing party's nominee by framing the opposing party's choice in terms of which candidate has the best chance to beat the incumbent?
For sure this elevated Mitt Romney, thought to be the Republicans' best chance to beat President Obama in 2012. For sure this elevated John Kerry, thought to be the Democrats' best chance to beat President GW Bush in 2004. I have to think that a similar collective thought process elevated Bob Dole among the Republicans in 1996 and Bill Clinton among the Democrats in 1992.
The particular wrinkle this time is that the Democrats, while united in the goal of beating President Trump, seem to be quite divided in their opinions of how this can best be done. This is reflected in the debate of whether to focus on winning back white working-class voters in PA, MI and WI, or whether to focus on increasing minority turnout in FL, NC, AZ and GA. (My own answer? Why not do both, with equal vigor at the same time?) But that division is why so many are running this time.
4
Mr. Bruni: Points well-taken, surely. But, when has an election NOT been about electability? My prayer is at the end of the process the nominee, be it Biden or Bernie, or Hickenlooper, Gabbard, de Blasio or Yang, enjoys broad support. I'm on the left and would love to see a Sanders/Warren or Warren/Sanders ticket, but I will give full support to a "centrist" nominee. Forward together.
5
All you say sounds correct, at the moment, when the mass of Democratic primary voters are busy working their jobs and businesses, taking care of their children and deciding which bill to pay first and which will have to wait. When the primary season begins in February and they have to choose a candidate, the "moment" could be very different. When they lift up their heads and start paying attention to what candidates are saying, I believe their own needs, struggles and life experiences, their own values, hopes and dreams will click in and the face and chatter of the present occupant of the Oval Office will fade to the background. Their decisive question will be, "Was the old Democratic status quo with a few patches and tweaks good enough, or is it time to really shake things up?" Donald Trump will not be sitting at the kitchen table when they decide that.
4
The first candidate who comes out, not as gay,, not as a socialist, but an atheist will have the field to him/herself. Oddly enough Buttieieg (tired of looking up spelling) is both a proud gay man and also a Christian. In fact he affirms this belief by defending his same sex marriage by being ordained by God Almighty, not by dynamics of his life that he chooses to openly explore.
The political divide is broadly left (socialism-liberalism) opposed to the right (free-market libertarianism) as Sinclair Lewis wrote in the 1935 , not only can it happen here, but it has happened, and the hallmark of our first dictator is being wrapped in an American Flag and holding a bible.
The person who defines him/her self as an Atheist, could use another world, "humanist." Let him or her have the guts that Trump had to grab the mantle of power, but do it in the name of rationality, with the pain of existance that is not controlled by a creator.
We are on our own in perserving humankind, and the person who can articulate this with passion, who has lived a life digging into the challenges of civilization, just may have a chance.
And if the Democrats don't want her, let him run on his own party, a handful of multi-billionaires could fund it.
2
Biden is still and will still, live with his passed positions, cannon fodder for Trump.
Sanders has been in Congress how many years? What has he accomplished? So impressive a history, I can only recall he renamed a post office in Vermont.
Warren and Harris both very impressive women, I still need to learn more about. But we know being a woman with great policy ideas, sure won’t win the electoral college.
Buttigieg put be in the very impressed, potentially besotted category. A politician that knows about the sensor driven sewers in his city, how they operate and why it is good for his city, now that is governing.
4
"Trump pulled off his astonishing upset." Every time I read something like this it makes my blood start to boil.
Pundits and journalists seem to forget or overlook the fact that the American people did not vote Trump into office. The antiquated Electoral College abdicated their duty and put him in.
How can anybody say the voters did it, when 3 million more of us voted for the one who lost? Don't give up on voters - just hold those electors at the EC responsible.
By the way, who were all of those electors?
12
I think neither Bruni nor anyone commenting can appreciate how outside Russian influence will affect our next election. Everyone is talking as if this is just normal old politics, but there is one huge elephant sitting in the room wearing a Tolstoy shirt and sipping vodka.
11
Trump is your Daddy while he is the rest of Americas President.
Starting at around 10:30 pm est. election night the left and it's msm went into self destruct mode.
While living in your bubbles, echo chambers and group think you have no idea what is actually happening on the ground.
If you did you would be a lot more concerned then you are about 2020 then you already are.
1
Biden's skill at verbal jousting with Trump can be used to help elect a Dem (but not Biden). Warren can speak to the old white guys and tell them that they're still part of the family, they get to sit down to dinner with the whole American family.
3
"Uncle Joe into a hectoring presence."
You could say worse. You have done so.
You could find something negative to say about every Democrat candidate, like you did with Gore and Hillary. But you have the imprimatur of the Times. Instead of writing columns traducing Democrats, you could actually do reporting. Do not begin discussing Democrats in your column by accepting Trump's sobriquets, like you did here. Please.
2
Thank you, illustrator Ben Wiseman (and whoever was the art director for this piece) for putting E-Dubs front and center!
Decency may be the only qualification that will matter in 2020. Someone who respects the truth, tells it and challenges the rest of us to think for ourselves, not to e seduced by celebrity.
Most of the Democrats who are running are up for this challenge.
Who would have thought that character would be the main ingredient in a candidate to get elected? Unlike some of our other Presidents, say Reagan, Clinton, both Bushes? They all had impeccable manners, but that is not the same as bedrock character.
Warren, Sanders, Buttigieg, and Gabbard pass the character test for sure. They have proven already that they have principles that they live by. This is the question we will all be asking as the campaign gets in to full swing.
In fact Trump and Pence are only candidates who don't pass the character test. Maybe that is enough to vote them out.
2
Won't one of you folks write an op-ed about why there are no Republicans challenging Trump in 2020?
Such a person could be a spoiler for Trump, and thus a Great American Hero.
339
@Adam E.
There is at least one. The fact that you were unaware is, I suppose, a pretty good indicator of his chances against Agent Orange.
43
The reason is simple: the Republicans have bought almost totally into the horror of Trump. So, of course, no one would dare oppose him in a primary.
20
@Adam E. What about Weldon from Massachusetts? He's the GOP anti-Trump who's running.
36
I would be careful about giving Trump so much importance. He is probably going to be the only Republican running so the Democrats will have only him to run against. He is so bad that
any opponent will be running against his badness. And they will be running against his 'base' that everybody likes to talk about. It's not so much that he has such a major influence, it's that he is the only one the Democrats are running against.
2
We have to worry about the gorilla in the room - The Electoral College.
I know there's a thousand words or whatever you have to come up with, but I think we're overanalyzing here. Biden is up because (1) any sane Democrat's first priority is getting Trump out of office, at all costs, and (2) American political reality being what it is, not what we might want it to be, the best bet for accomplishing that is a heterosexual white male with some credible appeal to other heterosexual white males in places like Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania who were somehow persuaded to vote for a blow-dried TV personality with small hands who never did an honest days' work in his life. Could Hickenlooper or Bullock be that guy? Sure, but only people who read the New York Times or live in Colorado and Montana have ever heard of them. I don't think Donald Trump is dictating the contours of the Democratic primary contest. Common sense--the realization that all the liberals in California and New York are not enough to beat him--is.
5
I'm concerned about the vitriol and lies that are going to spew forth from the Occupant, Faux News, and the major funding sources of this disastrous period of our history, as well as the hundreds of millions of dollars to be spent on keeping that evil, uncouth, poorly informed, and increasingly senile person in the White House.
When I evaluate the Dem candidates, I ask myself who can stand up to that assault and who can give equal measure in return. We saw that Kerry failed at that, not to mention the most recent loser. I can easily imagine Warren, Harris, Booker, Buttigieg, and De Blasio successfully going head-to-head with our wannabe dictator, but I'm less certain about the others. As we make our choice, let's make sure that our candidate is up to the challenge so that the US will recover and survive.
1
Of the non-Bidens, only one candidate has a coherent and rousing message (with whose detail I thoroughly disagree) worthy of competing with MAGA, and one that does appeal to many people, especially the young, and that is Bernie Sanders with, essentially, Justice for All.
The rest lose themselves in too much noise of nonsense, pablum, too much detail, policy, wonkism, virtue signalling, purity, and single issues not important to voters.
36
@John Xavier
Your list of negatives eliminates ALL Democrats, including Sanders, who easily "wears" at least three that you include.
13
@John Xavier III
Astonishing. You really think Elizabeth Warren is promulgating "pablum?" And on a "single issue?" You're not paying enough attention.
70
@John Xavier III John you need to come to the light, it is clear to me you hold the democrat party in a very low regard ie your support of Bernie the socialist. While I have never been to the NY city area I have been to Frwnce Europe lived in Iran in the 70's traveled the world and been to or lived in almost every region in the US I'm not claiming I know it all but I will tell you what ever your conception of Europe is I'm sure it's way rosery then it actually is and not by a little frwnce is a mess and has been for decades and it's just getting worse the UK has been shrinking since after world war II it went so far socialist while still being a statist ruled union that their economy is mainly fed by it's hold on international finance so the divide rich to poor only grows.
Whats older and more stable Met Life or the Social Security administration? The answer is it's not even close Met Life while Social Security consumes before it pays 1 dime in benefits 25% of what it takes in Met Life not only delivers benefits 2 to 4 times greater then what it collects plus covers it cost of doing business while at the same time has invested Trillions of dollars creating jobs & economic growth to the Nation which in turns helps growth the economy while earning profits that pay benefits. To this day Met life and a host of other like insurers have been doing this for over a century all have 100's billions of capital undermanagement. Logic reason socialism fails Capitalism builds.
2
Attempting to right a wrong is not the same as cowering in the face of it. "When they go low, we go high" will only take us so far this time. With Mr. Biden's credentials, it is his right, and as he may see it, his duty, to confront Trump's idiocy.
In Mr. Bruni's editorial, I actually see a lot of cynicism, which is disheartening, because it so reminds me of every Republican around these days. I'd rather hear about how to fix this mess than throw up my hands and say "Trump has ruined us, and that's just the way things are now."
1
"Cue Harris, Buttigieg, Bernie Sanders, Cory Booker, Julián Castro and Elizabeth Warren."
Harris & Buttigieg not qualify for a first name?
Their full names were already mentioned in the article, so surname alone suffices for second mention.
1
I only know about Trump, because this newspaper writes about him incessantly.
2
Funny thing is, Bruni is correct for the first time in years.
Trump dominates the media and befuddles the left.
They are left reacting to his actions, rather than acting on issues.
You guys in the bubble can't see it, but it spells 4 more years.
MAGA
😎😎😎
6
@Onelove
Lies are truth... sociopathic dimwits are stable geniuses... white supremacists are fine people... borderline-illiterates have the best words... up is down... black is white... and I have just learned that inside (the bubble) is outside and vice-versa.
I do agree with one thing though: MAGA. But the road to get there is to send trump packing back to Hollywood (or, even better, Leavenworth).
7
The problem with Biden's "Trump is a bad dream that will end" analysis is that it ignores what is happening in Europe and Brazil. Things are moving rightward in an ugly way. The mood isn't just Trump - it's overseas as well.
1
Trump debating Harris or Warren. Now that would be great to watch.
9
Interesting that Bruni ignores Inslee, on a day when the Times carries yet another story about extraordinary and deadly weather possibly related to climate change. I support Governor Inslee's presence on the debate stage precisely because we have to talk about climate change, right now, before we lose all ability as a human race to shift its deadly course. But Inslee belongs in this story because this president has done so much to deny its impact and to remove our country from its solutions.
3
As a senior who protests regularly against Trump, I agree with Bruni that the democrat nominee will in effect be chosen by our inept, loudmouth president. On the ground level, my fellow protesters’ obsession with defeating Trump very rarely extends to the question of who will defeat him. It is rather implicitly understood that the guy will defeat himself, and the candidate who’ll do that will be the one who contrasts most vividly with this most corrupt commander in chief... There’s much daylight and danger ahead. More Trump boneheaded buffoonery, and insults to our democracy are coming. All this will shape the the paths of each of the 2020 challengers.
3
"It shrinks him to a costly one-off, a wretched asterisk."
I take a little comfort that future historians will---I hope---largely regard the current POTUS as exactly that. Nice turn of phrase, Mr. Bruni.
5
Mr. Bruni I'm sure you don't have the time to read comments from your readers. Even so, thank you for your insights. I always look forward when you show up on Lemmon's nightly program to offer your comments usually about Trump. Please get off this popularity fashion to claim that a African American candidate wears a honorary badge of blackness that qualifies them over others running against Trump. Yes, Kamala Harris is extremely bright and articulate but she isn't Barack Obama and just look at her low % rating. I also don't understand that if your father is Pakastani and your mother's from India how that makes you African American just because people say you are. Anyway, I think most Americans aren't interested in voting for someone on the basis of race only. Yea, Obama was elected to some extent because he's African American (is it a sin to say you're Biracial?). I voted for him because he's a intelligent, thoughtful, dignified guy who's holds a strong belief in family values and a over abiding adherence to the oath of office he took to represent America's best interests and it's Constitution. Good Lord! Look at who we have now as president. Claiming African American status doesn't by any means make some candidate qualified to replace this jerk.
2
"Donald Trump Will Pick the Democratic Nominee" ... in the same way he has created your article, Mr. Bruni. You - the press - are just like the the Dems. You just can't quit him. (I'm a Dem, BTW). The protests in Sudan? Not a big deal. The humanitarian crisis in Idlib? Not as edit-worthy as it used to be. The environmental disaster associated with the Aussies opening up the outback to coal mining? Not a story. The media - that's you - is in fact more Trump-obsessed and more Trump-shaped than than the Dems.
4
This column is nonsense.
Pete Buttigieg can thank Joe Biden, Hilary Clinton and all the other Democratic insiders even more than Donald Trump for his rise. I can't prevent old white male fossils being Republican nominees but I can do something about not having another Democratic crony on the ballot.
People are literally sick of the career pol who is cozy with lobbyists and happy to get rich off of outrageous speaker fees and then claim they have no obligation to the businesses that grease their campaigns and private bank accounts.
That has nothing to do with Donald Trump. Democrats managed this despicable conduct on their own, and it's time to throw them out.
2
His stench will linger. Hopefully his DNA will be cleansed.
The Democratic Party should Chose the candidate who will make a difference to the American people. Unfortunately the DNC is moving toward old reliable corporatists regardless of their age.
I say Bernie is the human we need in the White House.
I guess they have no normal photos of Bernie in their archive.
Trump gets credit for kicking Obama's so called accomplishments to the curb.
Obama is the wretched asterisk. His terms were a costly adventure starting the great division of current politics: The trinity of minorities.
Identity politics coddling.
Trump will get another term and then get a Supreme Court seat.
That would really get the Dims going!
Build the wall!
2
@Pogo
Actually the "great division of current politics" was probably jump-started by Newt Gingrich and perhaps others of his era. The Tea Party upped the ante. Perhaps Obama's biggest misjudgment was thinking compromise was possible with the Repugnicans during his first two years. After the Democrats lost control of the House in 2010, the Great Obstruction began in earnest.
Build the wall! Around trump. Put bars on the windows and doors.
6
Why is not Bernie Sanders represented in the illustration by Ben Wiseman? Please don't tell me it's an accident. But you will, you will.
Attributing almost superhuman or, at any rate, idiot savant powers to Trump is to miss the point.
Trump and his enablers and cult followers are typical of what is afflicting democracies around the world. Aspirational politics is out. Scaremongering and cynicism is in.
It's going to take exceptional leadership to change that and restore America's moral leadership.
6
With all due respect, and I am not sure Mr. Bruni would disagree with this, let's stare reality squarely in the face, even though reality may basically be that US voters are a misogynist, xenophobic, racist and homophobic lot.
Here is who cannot in 2020 (maybe yes in 2040) win the US Presidential election, especially in the key states of PA, WI, MI, FL, OH, etc., in no special order:
- A Jewish person
- A gay person
- Anyone with an overly apocalyptic message
- A short person
- A person with a single-issue agenda (e.g. climate)
- A person with a Prohibitionist zeal
- A black person - Obama was a "guilt" choice, a checkmark
- An obese person
- Anyone to whom the label "socialist" is attached
- An unpleasant person
- A kook with absolutely no agenda
Interestingly, a woman is not on that list. Americans would elect a woman in heartbeat, in my opinion ... but not an unpleasant one.
Only Mr. Biden passes this sad test.
Democrats should realize, but they willfully don't, that there is a message in Mr. Biden's being a big front runner, despite his many flaws, advanced age and relative absence from the electoral fray. Democrats are gradually ramping up an anti-Biden campaign, because they yearn for a progressive or an identity candidate. In doing that, they immensely help Mr. Trump: no current candidate not named Biden stands a chance against the President, nonsensical inapt polls notwithstanding.
This is the reality: deal with it.
11:49 am Thur
1
Always enjoy people who claim their opinion is fact, or as this poster writes ‘reality’.
3
@T
OK, why argue. Check with me early November 2020.
1
When the Democratic demolition-derby is over, I'll vote for the last candidate standing.
3
I find this utterly specious.
Yet another pundit short on reason and long on rhetoric. Of course Trump will loom in an election he's contesting but to confine the dems to his orbit shows bruni's inability to look beyond his professional environment that reserves top of the fold ink for every Trump tweet. Forget Warren's plans, Gillibrand's legitimate fears (Kavanaugh, Alabama, Missouri), Sanders' bold vision, Inslee's environmentalism, Booker's focus on criminal justice reform, Buttigieg's and Moulton's anti-interventionism etc. Forget the thriving ecosystem of ideas the Dems have for the future, Bruni sees only Trump. He shares this focus with Biden (on whom Bruni stakes the bulk of evidentiary cover for this piece), and the piece would have been better if it limited its conclusion: Biden makes everything about Trump, not the dems as a whole. But would a narrow thesis meet the inflammatory mandate the editorial page seems to have?
The New York Times is quickly losing its status as the paper of record by failing to promote substantive engagement as it continues to focus on the most vaudevillian side of our politics.
2
Disgusting but true.
Yes, Trumps DNA will be on the railings of the White House along with the smell of an angry old man. The only thing this man cared about was making deals about building his hotels across Saudi Arabia, North Korea, and of course a gaudy looking hotel in Russia.
We must always remember all of the restrictions that Obama put in place that he dismantled. He could care less about future children and climate change. His pseudo-legacy will always be about money and how big his hotels will be. He's a greedy con man that's growing old unhappily.
3
All the Democratic candidates look so good because the current president is basically a criminal who hasn't been indicted yet!
2
On the other hand Obama was a direct result of the Bush Jr years. The two terrible wars and then the economic collapse that happened at the very end of the Bush presidency. Carter was Watergate's legitimate baby and Ford its less legitimate one. FDR was swept in after a decade of Republicans and largely in response to the economic collapse they presided over under the last of their dynasty, Hoover. Disagreeing with your post I think fear of Trump's inchoate ability to usurp old election playbooks single handedly make many less willing to look for a really progressive candidate. Because our eyes are on the lying force of nature we are worried about and we second guess ourselves and our choices through thee prism of who who we think can beat him. In that sense Trump blesses and then curses these candidates who are bot named Biden.
Uncle Joe's the guy. He'll only serve one term. Pair him up w/ Amy, or Kamala as running mate, and u have a dream team.
retired federal attorney F/70 FL voter
How many think that Sleepy Joe is running to be the lightning rod for tRump early in this process -- to provide more oxygen for the others to practice and prove their messages and messaging?
Whatever else Biden may be, he is not arrogant and stupid when speaking spontaneously like entitled-HRH Clinton? My neighbors moved from OH + W VA + PA + MO to be caretakers for dying parents. After the funerals, they did all the house rehab with their own hands and skills, including one woman with four table saws going in her garage, and were ready to vote D. Until she joined tRump with her labelings, i.e., "deplorables."
Comey did not cost HRH Clinton the 2016 election. Russian meddling in targeted zip codes did not cost HRH Clinton the election. Her refusal to speak plain-English, e.g., "systemic" every other word, and her entitlement and her letting her true labels for my neighbors cost HRH Clinton the election.
HRH? Her Royal Highness. She blew it on her entitlement opportunity.
2
I wonder if the fact that every broken down blogger and opinion columnist has typed out several hundred wild-eyed Trump pieces these last three years has contributed to the mood.
4
Dimocrat logic is hilarious.... Bruni makes the case that the dimocrat candidates are in various forms, a repudiation of President Trump. What they fail to realize is that the election of President Trump was a repudiation of everything dimocrats stand for and that is why he will easily win re-election.
2
But where will he go after November 2020.......be a roommate of his former attorney Michael Cohen. Feds at SDNY waiting.
Oh Yeah...nostalgia for the ObamaBiden years! Lest us not forget what ObamaBiden begat...Appeasement of Russia regarding Crimea and did nothing regarding election interference...enabling China corporate & intellectual theft...Rise of Isis & the destruction of Syria resulting in the worst Genocide in 50 years...Low growth rate and the rapid rise of income inequality... Gaslighting racial hatred and apologizing for Islamic terrorism...continued evisceration of our industrial and manufacturing strength...enabling Iran, one of the most heinous dictatorships to ever exist...and of course, the "scandal free administration", we are about to learn was complicit in weaponizing the DOJ, FBI, State Dept. & Intelligence agencies to commit crimes against a political party....Not to mention Biden's own issues with potential corruption regarding China & his son's financial dealings. Oh, I just can't wait for the nostalgia.
2
Even if?
white men vote identity politics. they are republicans.
2
I did not read the article because I find even the idea of it just disgusting.
You can't out stink a skunk and any Dem who falls into that trap is doomed to failure.
Mr. Bruni why do you say that Kamala Harris is "Black" ?
She is no more "Black" than Obama was "Black".
As if an Englishman moved to Ireland and married
a Scottish women and declared their child was Irish
and this was appointed to rule Ireland on behalf of the English
in 1820 so that the Irish would stop demanding "Home Rule".
Ms. Harris is 1/2 Jamaican and 1/2 Indian -
she is not "Black".
1
Isn't this elementary Hegel: position, negation, abnegation?
If Trump is the reference point, then it is all the more important to eliminate candidates like Joe Biden whose sole existence in the race is as civil counterpoint to Trump’s incivility. Instead go with candidates that have bold policy positions like Warren or Sanders.
But, my fear is that for the Democratic Party “nostalgia is the new revolution” and “yesterday is preferable to his tomorrow.” This is how the Democratic establishment thinks.
Finally, it’s not just Trumps’ DNA that will linger, but, more fundamentally, the Republican Party’s stench will linger. They have done structural damage that will last for years.
4
Mr. Bruni, please read Mr. Krugman.
Trump does help shape the Democratic race. He has provided a great opportunity for changing the substance of politics by recognizing how important it is for candidates to have, well, substance. Perhaps the nominee will be no different from those in the past, but Trump has presented a real opportunity for change. The variety of candidates is refreshing. Perhaps as a conservative looking to the past for inspiration you would prefer a candidate pre-selected, as was HRC. Not all of us find the same lessons in the past that you do.
1
"George W. Bush, scion of New England blue bloods, led to Obama, son of Kansas, Kenya and Hawaii."
WHAT??! More like "George W. Bush, entitled self-satisfied reckless frat boy, who rode on his daddy's coattails and never cracked a book, led to Obama, earnest cerebral mixed-race self-made law professor and community organizer."
8
You make a reasonable point...
As far as:
“...He said that the cashiers at Target “know more about economics than Trump...
He probably first said “the cashiers at Amazon”, before someone told him they didn’t have any...
As farther as:
“...gets up in the middle of the night to attack Bette Midler...
Any president can take a calamitous call at 3 AM...
Only a select few can make them...
PS
Do you think Alexa listens in...
She undoubtedly knows more about politics than He does...
1
"..George W. Bush, scion of New England blue bloods, led to Obama, son of Kansas, Kenya and Hawaii"
One small correction, 'son of Wall Street' not KansaS, Kenya and Hawaii.
Not only will Trump’s DNA linger, but also his stench for many years to come
2
Does Frank read these comments?
Bc I'm watching him on DVR right now & he said "I wish I had a nanny cam on his upbringing; I want to know how you raise a human being like Donald Trump." -- and I'LL TELL YOU: It's not about upbringing. I have a brother *just like Trump*. No other siblings are remotely close.
It's called MALIGNANT NARCISSISM, Frank. It's somehow in the DNA. Nothing to do with upbringing - except Trump's dad gave him *way too much money*. But study the all-caps topic above. That's everything we see going on with Donald. EVERYTHING. I've seen it my whole life. Textbook.
Wow you guys truely hate this guy. You may not want to admit it but Trump has done more for the African American community than any previous President. Prison freform Lowest unemployment in History for minorities, For someone you guys say is a Racist He sure hasn't provided policies to hurt minorities.
1
@Greg Harvey
Prison reform was a blessedly bipartisan reform that any president would have gotten done.
So given the new job numbers for minorities, I expect I will now see more people with brown skin in tech companies, or with stethoscopes around their necks, or in front of college classrooms, in corporate offices (not cleaning), and in public administration? Designing buildings and bridges and all manner of other jobs that pay a decent salary? Until that happens, I can only assume that the low unemployment numbers are because many low income people of color, like low income whites, are still working for $15/hour or less, maybe two jobs, no insurance and barely holding it together. But - lo! -they are employed.
1
Nice Illustration NYTimes. Keep pretending that Sanders doesn't exist.
2
@Murphy
He won't a in a couple years or less. Sorry.
1
@Syliva
I've got ten years on Sanders, work out 2hrs a day and still think very clearly. Certainly more clearly than the Donald, but then so can a melon.
1
Frank Bruni (and the NY Times in general) are again mostly dismissing Bernie Sanders' presence. (Bruni mentions him just once in his column.)
It is obvious that the political establishment and its spokespersons are interested in getting rid of Trump but not at the expense of a democratic candidate with a truly progressive agenda. The system is set for a round two of a mediocre alternative like Joe Biden.
Reality: Low information voters abound. They decided the last election. Simplistic slogans ("MAGA"), appeal to emotions, and 'what's in it for me' are all they care about. Policies, data, innovation...mean nothing to them. This is what Republicans target. It's why the USA is winning the race to the bottom.
2
@JCX
I actually think that many Trump voter are not thinking "what's in it for me?" They are thinking "Well the tariffs are hurting my bottom line, but I can take a hit for the team. It will be better down the road."
Why isn’t Frank Bruno talking about Trump’s unelectability ? Because despite Republican delusions that Trump can be re-elected, they are absolutely wrong, and their allowing Trump to be Trump makes him more unelectable every day.
Yes, the Democratic nominee will be a response to Trump, but will he or she win the general election even if there is a war, even if there is foreign government manipulation of the news to influence the election and an even higher, more sophisticated level of interference, even if Republicans play full out dirty and cheat, if there is voter suppression, "deepfake news....'
There is much that the Democratic nominee will not be able to control.
While 9 out of 10 Black women support the Democrats, somehow the candidates and media ignore the fact that 8 out of 10 BLACK MEN also tend to vote Democratic. However, like many voters in the WWC, they stay home when they feel that their issues and concerns are not being addressed (e.g. police brutality, rights of ex-felons, discrimination in employment hiring).
Until Democratic candidates make Black men feel that their votes count as well as others within the Democratic coalition, Democrats will continue to lose winnable elections by slim margins because of depressed black male turnout (and Republican voter suppression). Moreover, because of the First Step Act and Dems overwhelming praise and focus on the votes of Black women but not Black men, I predict that DJT will get 20-25% of the Black Male vote and win re-election.
The two things driving the crowded Dem primary are:
1) the ease of launching a national campaign in the digital age
2) the on-going encouragement of disillusion with the status quo and democracy itself orchestrated by Putin and the world's oligarchs, including our own.
I do not often disagree with Frank Bruni and when I do, I recheck my thinking. Having done that, I am convinced that Bruni has permitted his own doubts to unduly darken his analysis.
Democrats who react to Trump and permit him to define them will lose, as did every Republican opponent of Trump in 2016. All who interact with Trump soon shrink down to his size.
The smartest strategy for beating treasonous Trump and other morally debauched Republicans is two-fold:
1. Optimistically propose ambitious Big Plans to address America's current problems in reasonably detailed ways that envision and secure the nation's long term future. Where do we want America to be in 2040 and how can we get there?
2. Summarily dismiss all that Trump says and does, refusing to dive into Trump's pigpen. Instead, humiliate Trump by using carefully crafted humor to depict him as a middle-school bully and fool's gold con artist. (Seriously, engage high quality comedians to write biting but temperate one-liners to toss at Trump. Late night comedians have been eviscerating Trump and his Republican supporters.)
Trump and his unpatriotic enablers can best be defeated by a combining a positive program for ordinary working Americans with ruthless ridicule of its Russian-Republican enemies.
1
I loathe Trump but I will also not support a candidate who is for "free" college for all, reparations, forced loss of private insurance, etc.
2
The Dems should fight for all Americans, and say it! Obama should come and campaign. Women would back the nominee. Get the vote out!! And stop trying to please everyone! Talk to us as AMERICANS - all of us have who are citizens or have a legal right to be here must be treated equally.
Stop playing Diversity Politics, propose really immigration reform and Political Asylum laws, economic justice, health care, consumer and worker protections against the Robber Barons of the Republican Party.
The Deems must stick together as the gop does. Do not attack each other and remember the goal is dump-trump. I do not see Sanders running. He's too old, has little Black support and too far left. Someone needs to be able to take down trump in the debates.
But let's not forget the senate. McConnell must be taken down as well. So far I'm not impressed with Schumer. Nancy's the savvy one in leadership. Our nation is at the breaking point.
1
I would have expected Mr. Bruni, as a former prominent contributor to Food Section, to Express his opinion on whether the Trump-influenced Democratic candidate would also have Trump's addiction to cheeseburgers held in the hands.
Meh.
This is way too pessimistic.
We have many talented candidates. Fresh ideas are presented, a vision of America that will be America and not some post-apocalyptic, Putinesque and ugly shadow of our ideals.
We will choose, not Trump. We the People.
1
This is mostly a replay of 1972. The democrats will make the mistake of trying to push too far to the left, as they did back then, because they are still trying to make the revolution happen, as they were back then. Democrats back in 1972 did hold on to congress so that when Richard Nixon resigned they had a real chance with Jimmy Carter. That opportunity was squandered as Ronald Reagan/HW Bush took over for the next 12 years. We are about to fall that hard, I fear. Biden is, I believe, the only one whom Trump can't beat because he can't get to him. Democrats will push Elizabeth Warren and that would suit Trump just fine. He can transform her before our very eyes. Or any of them, really. He's a bully and he knows their weak spots. Biden, however, is teflon to Trump. That is why he fears him.
1
Sick of Joe Biden. Nice guy, but he lacks the spine to make real progress.
Yes, Trump's evil, lies, greed, and downright ugliness, along with his promotion of hatred, exclusion, and blaming victims, have frightened us.
But it has also reminded us that public service is an ideal, and that going along to get along is not good enough. Also, that promoting ideals without good execution is not good enough, along with blind loyalty and hatred of allies (Bernie).
I'm glad to see the best candidate by far (Elizabeth Warren) making progress. She's got what it takes to make a difference, as she has done all her life. She's as honest as the day is long, and she doesn't use hate as a weapon.
2
It doesn't matter who the Democrats nominate.
Trump cannot be beat.
3
"Even if he leaves the White House shortly after November 2020, his DNA will linger."
The Trump family stain will survive for years in the White House and beyond. I only hope America will still have a functioning democracy by the time he leaves.
4
As several writers have said, Trump has taken over the minds of NYT opinion writers. Here’s the questions Democrats must answer in order to beat Trump.
1. Can you deliver an economy that provides more job & financial security than the current economy?
2. Will the bullies of the world respect ✊you as a strong leader?
3. Will your health care plan provide an equal quality of care to the one currently provided to the 180,000,000 people by their employers?
4. Will you be able to deliver a compromise that will save Medicare & Social Security for the current & future generations?
5. Erasing college debit will force those who did not run up college debt(by work, saving or making less expensive choices) to pay for the debt of others. Is this a lesson that we want to teach our children?
Some will note that I have not mentioned climate. Straws & plastic bag bans might help but voluntarily limiting air travel (yes, this means you...Boomer tourists) would have much greater impact. Talk to me after that happens!
3
Isn't every challenger in an election reacting to the incumbent?
2
All true and good points by Mr Bruni. But in response to his apparent concern about Trump exerting undue influence over the who will be the next Democratic nominee, I would say this --- sometimes when you re-paint the house you can just put the new color right over the old. But sometimes you have to scrape that thing down to the bare wood and start over.
This is where we are. A Democratic president is not the end, it's barely the beginning, albeit an extremely important beginning. As long as Republicans hold the Senate, Mitch McConnell will do to the next Dem president what he did to Barack Obama. As long as Republicans hold the majority of governorships and state legislatures, we will continue to get regressive civil rights laws on abortion choice, voting rights and immigration.
We have to start somewhere, because this is going to be a long haul. And yes, we have to look backward a bit, not because of some nostalgic longing for the good ol' days, but because we cannot go forward until we first, and at least, get back to where we were just 2 1/2 years ago. Odd as it may sound, I would give anything right now to be back protesting the blocking of Merrick Garland's nomination --- because the alternative is Trump destroying the constitution.
If being the anti-Trump is what it takes to get started turning this thing around, if that's what defines "electability", hand me that scraper.
4
If Dems want to attract Donald's voters, they'll have to make bigger promises than he does. Those reachable voters understand Trump has not delivered anything he promised.
But for the terrified majority of voters, any Dem'll do. The candidate who rises to the top will have benefit of the other candidates' campaign promises to appeal to voters.
But getting rid of Trump is the prime directive.
@Occupy GovernmentActually
Really? He has not delivered anything he promised?
So lets just start with the more durable promises, such as a man called Neil Gorsuch, followed by another name whose initials I believe are BK. And then followed by 29 named to US Courts of Appeal ( with another 12 waiting in the pipeline), followed by 53 confirmed to US District Courts ( many more in the pipeline ), 2 confirmed to the US Court of Federal Claims, 2 confirmed to US Tax Court ( more pending confirmation), 4 confirmed to US Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, 1 confirmed to US Court of Appeals for Armed Forces. Many more pending confirmations. if you need specific names, please ask and I will give them to you.
the president has appointed 102 judges to the federal bench. That total includes 63 trial judges, 37 appeals judges and two Supreme Court justices.
1
It does not matter how many people support the democratic candidate if they do not get out and vote. The republicans have been a lot better at getting their supporters to vote and blocking the democrats' vote. Suppression and gerrymandering have worked well for the republicans.
If you're concerned about the monster, stop feeding it every 2 hours.
Starve it instead.
Write more about which democratic candidates have the most experience with policy. Discuss legislative history. Dig for the nuts and bolts of their proposals.
Work to convert the grammar of our election from optics to substance. Elevate the spheres of politics and journalism in this country through illuminating the nuances of our laws and policies, and how they are enforced.
This is not preaching an ideal. This is an urgent call for help.
6
@A The best Democratic candidate? John Kerry. But where is he?
@Antoine
Iran.
Trump presents himself as a champion of his supporters. Any Democratic candidate who wants to beat him has to do the same thing. Be a champion for their supporters, someone who has the charisma, the energy and the toughness to fight for them no matter the odds. Getting out and voting requires energy and motivation. The Democrat who runs against Trump will have to harness that energy or he or she will be defeated. This next election will be an election of one personality against another-- presidential elections always are.
2
Frank,
We are forgetting the primary cause of Trump's victory: Hillary Clinton. She was not a liked figure among Democrats.
4
@Jazzville
That combined with the fact that DNC and DWS pushed her nomination through in the most unethical manner. Wait for Joe Biden to be nominated using this exact same strategy. Unless DNC stops supporting establishment candidates, we have no chance of winning this election.
3
@Jazzville ~
Since Hillary Clinton received almost 3 million more votes than trump, I think she was more than liked enough to get elected from a likability perspective. How the heck could trump ever be called likable?
Putin (Russia) is who despised Sec. Clinton and the Russian interference was damaging, probably in more ways than we already know.
5
@Jazzville Speak for yourself. Clinton was likes among a large number of Democrats.
4
While I agree in a very general way, this is far from the whole picture. The biggest problem in this country, regardless of who realizes it and who doesn’t, is the stagnation of the middle class. The middle class has driven the economy of this country for a number of generations and the loss of it is responsible for a lot of the ills the country is currently suffering. Any candidate who can tap into that and provide real, workable solutions and then communicate them effectively will go a long way toward winning the presidency. Focusing solely on “Not Trump” won’t win the day. In the end people need something to vote for, not simply against.
The other thing to consider here is the media’s responsibility when it comes to Trump’s election. His antics fascinated nearly every media outlet to the point where he obliterated any discussion of policy and plans for the future made by other, more serious candidates, and that might have actually been a strategy rather than an accident. The media could do this country a great service by learning that lesson and focusing the public’s attention on the policy goals of all the candidates, and less on Trump’s latest juvenile nicknames for his adversaries, or on his latest ridiculous tweets. The media in this country is charged with informing the public, so make it your job to tell the public what they need to know to make good decisions at the voting booth come November, 2020.
7
@WesternMass The media should only report on his lawbreaking as it goes on and don't acknowledge his tweets after they do. Eyes on the ball, don't let the noise slow you down.
1
I got polled once about 10 years ago when we still had a landline at home, it about 20 minutes. I would not take a poll on my cell phone and I am pretty sure most of my friends wouldn't either. I'd hope the polls are right but I really doubt it. Also to be considered is and I heard this from my Trump supporting former co-workers that gas lighting pollsters is considered sport on Facebook.
So if the polls are not to be trusted the best candidate to beat Trump should be picked in light demographic factors. Old white guys will not turn out the Democratic base of urban voters we need a lady of color Kamala Harris would be my 1st choice. Joe Biden would be my last choice.
That said this last thing about taking oppo info from a foreign government might change some minds.
2
You are correct that Trump is playing the democrats and will define who the democrat nominee is.
Media and democrats will keep on focusing on his personality and will nominate an antidote to Trump's personality. And the will find out at he election that voters may be amused by his alpha personality but vote only on basis of results. Middle and lower class have had the first hand experience of Obama's economic recovery and Trump's economic recovery. It won't be a difficult choice for them to make.
2
The Democrats have come to represent globalism and all that entails. They see the free movement of people, goods, and capital across national borders as a good thing. Globalism has produced huge winners especially in cities where multi national finance and business are mostly based. Cities have also been the destination of immigrants both legal and illegal. Democrats have come to represent the very poor and the very rich. The populist and nationalistic sentiment will continue to grow to the millions displaced by globalism's move to outsource manufacturing jobs while at the same time importing low wage workers. Warren had the only cogent response I have heard so far, but I am afraid she is unelectable.
It is 100% about electoral politics. Not issues. You must win the electoral votes. The one who will win will be the one who understands that you must, without fail, take a few key states and get their electors to vote solidly for the Democrat.
EVERYONE talks about the election as though it were a popular vote. It is not. All attention and all money and all campaigning must go to 100% secure specific swing states to vote Democratic.
If you want to help out, just get in your car and take a long summer trip to a flyover state and sit with a card table and a banner and a clipboard and talk to people and convince those people to vote for a Democrat.
Once the party decides which states those are, then nothing else matters.
8
Frank, I think you are right that Trump will have an important influence on the Democratic race but not for the reasons you cite. Your column here focuses on demographic groups (while males, women, etc.), but I think Trump highlighted the bankruptcy of the Democrats' strategy of trying to put together enough demographic and identity groups to get to 50.1%. In my opinion, Elizabeth Warren (and to a lesser extent, Bernie Sanders) has truly taken on board the lessons that Trump's victory holds for the Democrats. If Democrats continue to focus on our comfort zone -- the social justice and identity issues -- without having anything much to say about economic justice, we will continue to lose elections and the "D" next to a candidate's name will remain toxic in much of the country. Warren gets that. In the spirit of FDR and Harry Truman, Warren understands that Democrats MUST be able to articulate an economic agenda of fairness and opportunity for all. THAT's the way you speak to the "embittered and economically vulnerable" -- not just in the Rust Belt, but in the vast swathes of the country that have been de-industrialized and left for dead.
728
@Mike Right on and well said. That's it exactly.
56
@Mike- Oh I suspect the Democrats have well over the 50.1% that you mention, and I suspect that is a few ticks higher after the president's gaffe on foreign influence this week. The Democrats just need to insert that 50.1% better, strategically, across the electoral map. I think the Dems get the majority of the popular vote, regardless of whom the nominee is. The only way Trump wins again is with a careful and concentrated electoral map strategy. The Dems better have one of those of their own.
49
@Mike
An economic agenda of fairness and opportunity for all is just easy words--and will not be believed--unless it is paired with an analysis of why this has remained easy words instead of reality. Bernie and Warren give such an analysis in addition to examples that get people emotionally upset, while most others seem to dance around a condemnation of our economic system as it now works.
25
Frank, apparently you think progressive issues don’t have any power in this election, it’s all just how to position oneself vs. Trump. Nice bit of punditry. You think Bernie is driven by what Trump says, does or thinks? Think again.
1
Trump is the issue, the only real issue. And one should recognize this clearly. The election is the safest substitute for impeachment.
Every election is a competitive race and more so today than ever before. We have become so partisan that it is no longer a question of who we like better, but a question of who we hate less. Trump has contributed to this atmosphere of hatred and loathing.
I would not be surprised if Trump will be written down in history as the worst president we have ever had. True, he has relied on like-minded enablers like Mitch McConnell and they too are loathed by Democrats.
And the feeling among non-Republican-enablers-and-those -who-benefit-from-his-policies (essentially the billionaire class) is that ANYONE else would be much, much better. So we have dozens who have lined up, and truthfully the least of the pack would be much better for America and the Globe. We would ameliorate climate change, be able to rely on the Bully Pulpit for information, stop the damaging trade wars, treat desperate migrants humanely, cut down on racist support, patch up our alliances with democratic governments, reinvigorate our institutions such as the Department of Justice and others, help our poorer people economically, help educate those without funds, help people who are ill, help people buy medicines, etc., etc. It goes on and on, the fixing of all the problems this president and his Republican cohorts have caused.
Anyone from the other side of the aisle would be better. Therefore, there are a long, long list of candidates.
What's your point? trump's DNA will linger and contaminate the notion long after he leaves the WH, no matter how many or how few Democratic candidates vie for the nomination, or which of them prevails.
And whoever comes out on top will owe trump absolutely nothing. That goes especially for Elizabeth Warren. She has of course done what any Democrat with a spine should do (that means you, Madame Speaker) and pushed for impeachment. The Dems should see it as a duty, regardless of some imagined electoral cost. But Warren is mostly looking past trump and laying out her vision of what a post-trump, post-GOP administration can do for the people.
22:25 EDT, 06/14
3
Earth to Frank Bruni: The President of the USA is NOT the leader of the free world. To be a leader, people need to choose you, and to follow you. We'll let you know when the rest of the world chooses and follows one of your politicians.
6
You are kinda letting Trump own your mind, Frank -- as have most NYT columnists and editors.
A winning candidate won't make his campaign about Trump, but about what THAT individual can (and cannot) do to bring about positive change and reform in the USA.
Hillary made it all about "how awful Trump was" and not about her own message. She lost.
3
@Concerned Citizen, actually, Hillary talked a lot about other things besides Trump. We just did not hear about it because news sources were so enamored with Mr. Trumps behavior that it dominated coverage.
5
I think there were 15 GOP presidential contenders when Trump won the primaries. Myself I am looking at what the candidate stands for; what the candidate is proposing. Sure I want the nominee to be someone who can beat the Liar in Chief but policies and positions will be what sway me.
At one point, Biden and Trump threatened each other with a fistfight. Could we see that? Please?
Imagine the ratings. Huge!
3
@Matthew Hughes
You know that Trump frequently backs out of threats. No doubt he would back out of this fight--he has bone spurs.
This article is symptomatic of the Democrats problem. As they say in Texas, "all hat and no cattle". They're focused on optics and Trump's character but have no workable policies. The only person talking about policy, Elizabeth Warren, wants you to believe that she "has a plan for that", but it is one-size-fits-all, centralized planning straight out of the Soviet Union. She'll run every aspect of your life... because she has a plan for everything.
2
I saw Kirsten Gillibrand's last town hall. She does not deserve serious consideration for a coffee meet-up.
2
Democrats would be well served to find a candidate with a positive message beyond Trump hatred. A positive plan that is realistic would be a good start. Universal free-everything paid for by the phantom rich is not it. Enlisting felons, pubescent teens and illegal aliens to vote is not it either. Identity politics that bashes some majority group while professing tolerance is a losing hand. And sorry, open borders is definitely not the ticket.
A little honesty wouldn’t hurt either. The continual lie about Trump being a foreign agent is ludicrous and well past its shelf life. The quest for power creates desperate, sometimes comical actions, which are on full display.
Unless Democrats produce a candidate that actually loves America more than they hate Trump, appears to works on behalf of its citizens, and offers a realistic plan, Trump wins in a landslide. Outside the media and entertainment bubble, America is on a very positive trajectory. One that average, working, thinking voters will likely opt to stick with.
3
Only Beowulf could defeat Grendel. Democratic voters want a candidate who can defeat the [fill in] in the White House. So?
Trump’s DNA will not linger once he is defeated. But his stain and his stench will long permeate our politics.
1. His stench will linger for generations. but eventually, it will be dissipated. Johnson is a footnote. Nixon, a personally unknown experience to people born after 1976. Clinton served two terms and is still popular.
2.What Trump does not recognize or understand is that he is not the hero he sees himself as, but a prime example of just what a human being should not be. His case history will be taught for generations unlike Harding's or Jackson's which are now dredged up when needed. If I recall correctly, they each had only one real issue of contention. not a truckload.
3 .Four of of ten should make every evangelical cringe;
thou shalt not commit adultery
thou shalt not steal
thous shalt not bear false witness
thou shalt not covet . . .
and maybe even a fifth, if he committed murder or caused it.
What is striking today is watching this disaster of a crooked president deteriorate in front of our very eyes.
Yes, believe what you see and hear. He is not fake news.
3
If they were rational people, Democrats would cancel their participation in the 2020 election. Alas, they are not rational, and Trump will have a field day. Trump, the immoral narcissist, has captured the soul of America, a soul so dark that it took a vile psychopath to claim it his own. As a foreigner with half a century in the US, the minority of decent educated Americans who cheer on the Democrats remind me of educated decent people anywhere in the world where the cancer of dictatorship takes over. If Americans could see themselves from outside perhaps they would understand what I mean. The tragic end of the American Republic is at hand, a lot sooner than most ever imagined.
I like the variety of Democrat candidates. All are intelligent in a good way (not criminal like Trump and his ring kissers).
The final ticket will be a strong President and VP no doubt.
Not that it matters what I think but Warren would be outstanding as our next President.
2
Cherry picking who his Democratic rival is going to be in 2020 is the ultimate birthday present for Donald Trump.
Whomever becomes the Democratic candidate, we are still left with the detritus trump left behind on the Supreme Court.
2
@David J
Which detritus has hardly voted as a bloc.
We were told that Kavanaugh meant the end of the Republic and the subjugation of women a la The Handmaid's Tale. Time to stop the overheating.
I doubt a man/President has ever been as underestimated as Donald Trump.
Every time I read an article like this, that has such confidence that some Democrat.... any Democrat..... is going to be the next President, I am reminded how every media outlet (read Liberal Democrat propaganda outlet) told the world that Trump would a) never be the GOP primary winner, b) could never beat the unbeatable Hillary, and c) never implement his policies if elected.
If it is true that Trump is going to hand pick his Democrat candidate, what does that say about a Democratic party that would make Stalin proud? And what does that say about Trump's ability to manipulate the process? Doesn't matter anyway. Trump is going to win by a healthy margin in 2020. Just like in 2016, the silent majority will again speak. Only this time in the knowledge that, like him or hate him, Trump is exactly what he said he is, and do what he said he'd do. Rare.
1
@Rocky
I agree wholeheartedly with your first sentence (and much of the rest). Trump is shrewd, dominant and well-versed in street-fighter politics (you know, the kind the Democrats condemn in him but say their candidates must show more of).
He never, ever, gives up and he always--always--fights back. Anyone who thinks he's an electoral goner at this stage is in fantasy.
3
Americans are totally burned out by crazy, as your commentary has very correctly noted. They will vote for Biden because he represents a return to normalcy. If he plays it right, he'll name a woman of color as his running mate and let it be known that he'll be a one term president. The country is crying out for calm and yes, quieter days of yesteryears' presidencies. As another comment above noted, Biden knows his way around Washington and will get as much done as Congress allows. After four years of Biden's stabilizing presidency, Americans will be ready for: Warren or Harris or Klobuchar or Buttigeg!
1
The DNC and DCCC are just as much to blame. They will rig this primary election, just as they did in 2016.
2
Day 1] One of 2 leading Democratic front-runners gives major policy speech.
Day 2] Frank Bruni:"La-la-la-la I can't hear you!"
1
at this early date, Biden leads the polls, which mean nothing. but his ship has sailed. time for some new blood, new ideas, and fresh faces. for old, white, washed up, and predictable, we already have Trump - and if he strokes out, Pence.
Interesting choice to not show Bernie Sanders, clearly one of the frontrunners, in the illustration.
1
Trump is probably loving this column, reassuring himself that according to Frank Bruni no matter what happens in the 2020 election, the Trump candidate will win.
This isn't merely exaggeration - it's way over the top.
Bruni is too consumed with President Russia.
Be honest, Frank. Look in the mirror, shall we? You and your fellow media hustlers will pick the Democratic nominee. You are responsible for the bloat, tenor and dynamics of the Trump presidency. Never mind absolution, let's see the real Frank.
2
Whoever is chosen should choose "sanity and civility" as their slogan.
You ignore the 20 investigations of Trump ongoing that could drastically change the calculus. Is Trump tailoring Frank Bruni?
1
Bruni seems to overlook the fact that it is the goal of ALL presidential candidates to focus on their opponent and to win the election.
I think Trump is in Bruni's head with all of this psycho babble about Trump as the man behind the curtain diabolically picking his opponent.
I hope Biden is fixated on Trump and not on niche issues like transgender bathroom access or banning plastic soda straws.
"And with all of that, he has put Biden on the attack, turning a politician known warmly as Uncle Joe into a hectoring presence. "
Uh, check with your colleagues, Frank. Or check with Trump. The CW is Biden is casually coasting and kind of sleepy.
Please keep up next time, OK? This column does not sound pithy and erudite; it sounds lost and desperate.
Oh come on you opinion writers you are giving Trump to much credit, if you have learned anything over the last two years you know we will lock step him out of the Oval Office. The man is entertainment that’s all a cross between Andrew Dice Clay and Rodney Dangerfield
Not only will Trump pick the nominee....
....Nancy will let him pick whether he gets impeached or not.
Long before Donald Trump, there were Republicans. Republicans tried to kill the Affordable Care Act (and, before that, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security); tried to kill the Violence Against Women Act; tried to criminalize abortion & birth control; wrote voting statutes to hobble black citizens; coerced the country into at least two needless overseas wars; rewrote the tax code to enrich themselves and starve everybody else; and treated Barack Obama like an educated indentured servant.
Donald Trump is the symptom, not the disease. Republicans are the disease.
Joe Biden has never understood this, and never will understand it. He will sell us out faster than a pawnbroker peddles a fake Rolex.
1
The media is not just a disseminator. They are an amplifier.
As such, when they cover Trump’s personal insults and responses they are not only doing his bidding but tacitly agreeing to its relevance.
Stop it!
3
...And all of the above, but also... we now know we can be inexperienced, dumb, criminal and ignorant and still be president of the United States! We can all hope, when you think of it!
Well: perhaps with a little gerrymandering here, a few useful connections (over) there, and a whole lot of untraceable contribution cash...but yeah! We're all contenders - isn't that democracy? (At least for a while?)
You forget that O, and decades of passive Rs are what gave us Trump.
2
Dems will win if we “vote blue no matter who” in 2020.
2
I think one manifestation of the "Trump effect" is the belief that anyone can, in fact, grow up to be President. Hence, 23 candidates, seemingly a list of every Democrat in the country with political ambitions. Or maybe a representative of every constituency that Trump has sneered at.
I'm going with whoever has experience in governance, a firm grip on the issues (and what to do about them), and a history of fighting for what I think is right. Having the most viral hits on social media does not matter to me.
1
@Frank O
Of course, Trump defies that old adage by demonstrating, clearly, that you do not need to grow up in order to become president.
Campaigns are won and lost by who actually votes on election day. The very same country that elected Obama elected Trump.
The Democrats need a candidate that resonates with both the base and then vast majority that pay little attention to politics. My pick is Warren because she is the only candidate with clear, detailed plans. Unfortunately, Americans prefer sizzle to steak.
True enough Frank. And your next column could be about Trump's power after being in office. Let's be hopeful and believe that Trump's current polling is accurate and holds - and he doesn't make it to a second term.
What will The Liar in Chief's next act be? Fox News commentator? A new reality show? Trump towers finally in Saudi Arabia and Moscow? Will there be any oxygen left as long as Trump still lives?
How he will undermine democracy and any attempt at a "new and fair minded" governance by any new president could be the next big story. How do you squelch the Devil himself?
1
"Even if he leaves the White House shortly after November 2020, his DNA will linger."
His DNA would linger anyway. It goes far deeper than the White House.
1
Existential is too big a word. He's evil and let's leave it at that.
2
@JR IF I SEE THAT WORD EXISTENTIAL OR HEAR IT ON THE NEWS - I WOULD ASK THAT PEOPLE LOOK UP THE MEANING AND READ THE MANY BOOKS ABOUT WHAT EXISTENTIALISM IS AND WAS EARLIER LAST CENTURY.
Frank, don't worry. Our crowded stage of Democrats is not sucking the oxygen out of the most qualified. The sheer number of the younger, the older, the women, the liberal and moderate, the Brown and Black-skinned, the gay, are representative of millions of us who are appalled, disgusted, and sickened by a blatantly amoral, unhinged, corrupt man. Down deep, I believe everyone of us will support whomever our nominee is whether s/he be our first choice or twenty-fourth. We are desperate for leadership; we are desperate for good governance; we are desperate for intelligence, wisdom, and above all a moral and ethical soul and character. I lived too long, and have seen a lot. But if there is one thing I refuse to relinquish, it is my hope and faith in Americans. There are more good, decent people than there are bigots, racists, and fanatical evangelicals.
425
@Kathy Lollock
Well said. I do believe you spoke for me and the majority of US voters who will make the next presidential election our biggest one ever. (trump's doing) 1st choice or 24th choice. We will speak and I cannot wait for that day.
32
@Kathy Lollock
There are many in the crowded field I don't particular want to see as president and some I really can't bear but I will WITHOUT FAIL support the Democratic nominee…
And I believe most of my fellow Americans will do the same.
Let us remember that Trump eked out an Electoral win only with 77,000 votes across three states. How many of those 77,000 will vote Trump again? Don't know, but surely we can counter them with more turnout in 2020… meaning it's so important to vote, and not quibble about whether your preferred candidate made it or not. Besides, all 23 of them are better than the thing fouling the Oval Office.
45
@Kathy Lollock
Only 26% of the eligible voters went for Individual 1. There is no way you are not in the majority. What if 70 -75% of the 74 % who didn't vote for Individual 1 or not vote at all, it would be a Blue Tsunami
4
To state the obvious: the only thing that matters is who can win WI, OH, PA and MI.
121
@GC Bernie!
8
@GC and Florida. You forgot FL.
7
@GC i hope so. But what if “it’s different this time”?
5
The columnist starts with the right premise and follows up with the wrong example/s. His citing of instances as to how Trump will pick the Democratic nominee, dont stand up. Because the reasoning is based on how voters will be influenced by Trump in their vote for the next President. But that happens all the time, so what's new there ?
Still he's right Trump will pick the Democratic nominee. But the manner in which he will do, will be dictated by the manner in which he chooses to attack potential Democratic contenders. And that in turn will directly influence the voters as to their judgement regarding which candidate is most opposed and disliked by Trump.
3
Bruni puts too much emphasis on Trump, the person. Trumpism, the political movement, is much more importantly the manifestation of both an exceedingly angry, and large, segment of the population (blue-collar Whites) and a traditional Republican constituency (wealthy social conservatives). It makes perfect sense that Trumpism (rather than Donald Trump) plays a major role in this election cycle.
PS - I predict a Biden/Harris ticket at the end.
8
It is quite obvious that the current resident of the White House is always a major factor in whom the opposing party chooses to run against them. How can it not be? Like it or not (and I don't), this "President" looms large in the worldwide stage because he is hated and despised by millions around the world.
15
Unfortunately for the country, the Democratic candidate is only a small part of the contest. Whoever that candidate is will also have to contend with an unprecedented level of interference with the election, some of which will come directly from the Republican machine (Including the Supreme Court's five-Catholic-man majority), but some of which will also come from outside interference, most notably from Russia.
Oh, and the interference from Russia will also have the blessing of the Republicans, as it will directly benefit them if precedent is any guide. That's why none of the Democratic House bills to improve election security have been allowed to the Senate floor by Mitch McConnell.
18
@Vesuviano . Mitch McConnell should be impeached as well as Trump. He is a vile man who will not stand for his country but only for the opportunity to be reelected. He enables Trump. My question is and has always been, "who is behind these so called politicians?"
3
Trump was elected not because of his personal virtues. Despite his personal flaws, he was elected by the people who thought that the other side does not represent their interest whether it is illegal immigration, cultural values, trade, tax, foreign policy, education, etc. Almost all democratic candidates still do not represent them in those areas and they are doomed. Those people who elected Trump, may be more now, believe Trump is protecting their interest and doing a good job.
6
There's a decent point here - Trump's rise has certainly shaken the box, expanded the limits of the conceivable, and created a hunger on the left for someone either more or less like him (more of a fighter, less of a know nothing). But don't say Trump will -determine- the Democratic candidate. There are a multitude of ways to differ from Trump, and a multitude of ways to adopt a similarly pugnacious tone and tactics, too. Candidates as different as Biden and Harris, Buttigieg and Warren, all serve to satisfy our hunger for "something different, something better".
Many Republicans want that, too. Therefore I prefer outreach, and a candidate that makes symbolic concessions to traditional America - as Biden or Buttigieg do, in their ways - in order to serve as an ambassador for progressive policy. We need to widen and de-militarize our tent on the left: or in other words, turn center-left into the new center.
Trump will only 'determine' our choice in the sense that any problem constrains what counts as a solution. It is for us to determine which solution to put our chips on. I urge my fellows on the left to bet on renewed comity founded on moral and intellectual decency, and moderation of our progressive ambitions. We're asking -everyone- to trust us with the reigns of power, not just progressive activists. We're trying to build a country in which everyone can feel at home - not just us.
13
It is possible to win the Democratic nomination without black support. It is not possible for a Democrat to beat Trump without massive black support.
It really is that simple.
Now black voters, like many of the rest of us, may turn out massively and Vote Blue no matter who the Democratic nominee turns out to be. On the other hand, if they are taken for granted, maybe not.
So, it really might be helpful if FB, the other op-ed writers and ,for that matter, the news guys started to cover this issue. Because, honestly, it really doesn’t matter how many well-educated progressive whites like Liz or Pete. It’s how many black voters turnout in November 2020.
7
To put this simply this article suggests the Democrats will pick the opposite of Trump as their nominee. I agree. The real question is what or which one is the most opposite of Trump? The career Washington Politician? The Black Woman? The Gay Midwesterner? The Socialist? Young, Not Rich, Experienced in Government, Angry, Poised, Military Service, Gender, Orientation, Not Tweeting, what exactly to most Democrats is the opposite of Trump? I will be interesting to find out in the next 10 months or so.
1
Yes, of course. Rather than being a reasonable nation that considers all factors before deciding what to do and want, including the person to vote for, we seem largely now to be a emotionally reactionary one that demands the opposite of what is loathed. At one time it was for many “ABB,” now for even many more it’s “ABT.” We may wind up with getting rid of Trump, which in my view is so critical for the nation to be what it constitutionally is; but doing so in reactionary mode to what is detested about him most, we are in a very basic way like him, blindly bullying out of self-interest at that. At day’s end reason takes a back-seat with this, and the situation goes on and on in the mood of increasing incivility.
It does not bother me that so many candidates have entered the field on the Democratic side. Why? Because each has a unique voting constituency that will add to the final nominee's support. An awakened electorate is strongest element in turning towards a stronger democracy. Voting is key. Even though Dem or Dem leaning voters have their favorites, all indicate they will work for the eventual nominee. That is cause for optimism, not its opposite.
5
The reason Trump won over Clinton is that his voters believed that their lives would be better off with Trump as president. The Democratic candidate who can win the election is the one who can convince voters their lives will be worse off under Trump. It's that simple.
15
Considering the existential threat that Trump represents to democracy in the US it is not surprising that he is driving the selection of the 2020 Democratic nominee. Many of us see the ability to defeat Trump as the most, perhaps only desirable quality in a candidate.
Both political parties have neglected and ignored the very real needs of normal, working class Americans for far to long. Republicans hold them in no regard, despite their excellent PR and marketing. Democrats hold them in more regard but still cave under the need to satisfy the rich in order to remain in office. That caused so many people to hit the panic button and vote for Trump because they saw no hope in following along with politics as usual.
I like many potential Democratic candidates and in particular Elizabeth Warren, who has real, workable ideas about how to fix the very things that drove people to vote for Trump in 2016. A Warren Booker ticket sounds like dream team to me and it will be interesting to see who gets the nod in the end.
The US finds itself at a crisis point today and it will either drastically change politics to more reflect the needs of the majority of Americans or it will wither and die, as it seems to be doing now.
6
Aren't all opposing candidates a reaction to the incumbent? What was Obama but the opposite of G.W. Bush? And, what was G. W. Bush but a reaction to Bill Clinton? It seems perfectly normal that, especially when a president has such a low approval rating, his opposite would attract votes. I don't see that the Democratic candidates are so unique in that regard. And, that there are so many of them is no different than the number of Republicans in the 2016 race. They were a reaction to Obama. What we're seeing in this election doesn't appear all that unusual to me.
7
There is most certainly blood in the water and that usually will lead to a feeding frenzy.
And let's be real, running for president does elevate your political profile. So it is no surprise that the field is crowded.
No doubt each candidate believes that they can beat Trump. The real question is whether they can beat each other. And of course, in that effort, how to do just that.
2
Trumpism, which is the new conservatism, which is the new Republicanism, is here to stay. The idea that Trump is important is a myth. Trump is only the most recent avatar of a brand of conservatism which has always been active but tended to be kept hidden because it doesn’t look good vis-á-vis “American values.” Trumpism aims to conserve the status quo of privilege—that white, male, Christian, straight Americans own the country and should share its wealth. This brand of conservatism will persist after Mr. Trump is gone because it is a compelling idea for a lot of Americans, with or without Mr. Trump’s leadership. Conservatives have abandoned their lofty ideals—free trade, fiscal conservatism, making the world safe for democracy—but not their darker intentions—keep immigrants out, limit the votes of dark-skinned people, keep Christianity the national religion, keep the dominant oligarchy intact. Mr. Trump is willing to pronounce these ideals unabashedly, and he has found support for them, because they are the important thing, not him. He is voicing the feelings of a lot of people who fear for their way of life. Mr. Trump will soon disappear, but Trumpism will quickly find a new avatar.
7
I agree, but this is an early truth. I am hungrily anticipating a return to character and values as the defining themes of the most successful candidates. That is where TaDump is very vulnerable and where America As We Knew It still resides.
2
Ya' think? I got a hunch that comments will not be moderated for civility at the first, last or any debate in between, when it comes down to fall 2020. Not much commenting was done about Senator Warren by Mr. Bruni, but action speaks louder than words---and her actions reveal that she has the moxie, the guile, the guts, the vision and most importantly, the backbone, to stand for justice and against Trump.
The Portuguese already have a nickname for Senator Warren: O Caçador. That means, "The Hunter."
Guess who she's hunting.
And she ain't afraid to take Trump down. Senator Warren has well-proved that she is not afraid to stand tall for the Constitution and get Trump impeached NOW. Nobody in the White House is steering her candidacy, she is not a counter-puncher, thank God. She leads with hooks and uppercuts, which is to say, she leads with courage and ideas. Senator Warren for President, 2020!
22
Most of these Dems have no hope against Trump in 2020.
Cue, all the hucksters with zero chance of defeating him (Yang, Gillibrand, Castro, well basically all except Biden and Bernie) flocking to make hay .
3
@GANDER-FIR - I agree with your position; however, only Andrew Yang has thoughtful positions on the issues. I hope America will see this during the debates. Unless the Democratic nominee can articulate a solid vision to improve ALL American's lives, Trump WILL win.
2
@GANDER-FIR Do you really see the Dem primary as a battle between two "elderly white men'? Leading to an election choice of this elderly white man or that one? How very depressing that this is even a possibility. It doesn't bode well for the future of American"democracy" or the future of the US as a meaningful figure on the world stage.
@Cariad
It is statements like "battle between two elderly white men " that reduce the Dem primary in to a contest polluted/defined solely by toxic/repulsive Leftist Identity Politics that will re-elect Trump to another term in 2020.
Because the reaction to the above will be another dose of White Male Right Wing Identity Politics that elected Trump in the first place.
Dems never learn.
We should be just fine.
The Weimar Republic faced similar issues, with left-wing factions all vying for power, ignoring the threat of the right-wing nationalists who had been on the ascent, until it was too late.
But that could never happen here.
5
I suppose this is not the intention of this piece, but to me it reads as if trump is sitting in Dr. Evil’s control room, turning knobs and moving levers to manipulate the Dem candidates, whom (following this interpretation) he himself selected. He would probably be flattered.
In reality, trump’s only influence on the Democratic field is a result of his stupefying unpresidentiality. His head-to-toe grotesqueness. The utter vileness of his character. Pick any reasonable human being, pick their defining strength, and a comparison to trump would justify their candidacy. To me, that makes trump’s role in the Democratic race, if anything, inconsequential.
But I do hope that, whether his adversary is an old white male or a young woman of colour or anything in between, his four years in office are indeed reduced to a “wretched asterisk” — a shameful chapter in future American history books. A chapter with sections on Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, Devin Nunes, and the rest of trump’s army of apologists and appeasers. Could be a long chapter...
21
Until the Democratic majority in the House declares contempt of Congress citations against everyone who has refused to cooperate or appear post-summons or subpoena, and proceed to arrests for those who ignore them —from Barr to the Trumps to staff members — Trump will continue to accumulate power, recruit foreign assistance, and steal the next election. His heft will carry Republican Senate candidates, assuring a block on impeachment trials. Does anyone really think that presidency-for-life has not crossed this lunatic’s mind? Does anyone think McConnell or Cornyn would intervene? Who will stop him? Who stops him now?
In short, the Democrats have a short window to do everything the law allows the House to do, and more, to exercise oversight. Short, because they remain feckless and will probably get trounced by the Trump lie machine in 2020. The corrupt GOP will run the deck to a one-party system. This was Karl Rove’s ambition. Trump’s narcissism has made the DNC and a one who supports it an “enemy of the state.” (Read, “c’est moi”.) The ONLY way to stop Trump is to pull out all the stops, issue the feared contempt citations and use incarceration powers to the max. Don’t negotiate with Barr — bust him. Get testimony and gather enough evidence to hire another special counsel. They have the authority and the responsibility. Let the GOP howl.
7
I have always considered myself an Independent but I am moving towards the Democrats because of disgusting republicans like McConnell and Chao and Ross and Bolton. I don't consider the White House occupant a member of any political party
17
History shows a consistent, yet bizarre, pattern of seemingly reasonable people capitulating to tyrants, narcissists and megalomaniacs, and feeding the megalomania mindlessly, and the fealty to Trump the entire Republican Party and 40% of our electorate is no different. Do these people also pour gasoline on a fire...in their living rooms...while the baby is asleep upstairs and the smoke detectors aren't working? The GOP and its media cohort FOX have been stunningly successful exploiting many Americans and convincing them that the left is their real enemy, to the point where the GOP more resembles a cult now, where everyone outside that cult is an enemy and anyone who helps their cult, ie; Putin, Kim, MBS, Trump...is to be looked up to. Feeding megalomaniacs is never a good idea, but that is what we are witnessing. It is also why there must be a muscular resistance, and in Democrats, we don't have it. This is all very, very frightening. I don't even care if Trump is re-elected via the usual petulant base angry that someone dared try to hold him accountable. It is time to stop erring, and umming, and looking for information..we have it! Open impeachment hearings NOW, Democrats.
5
Girl, you're being over-dramatic. The current occupant of the White House *always* determines the candidate in the opposing party.
3
According to Trump, Norway could guide our next election. what is his fixation with Norway?
1
@zula It has lots of white people and does not get involved in the politics around them.
I don’t think there’s anything new here. Just about every campaign of every president since JFK has been a reaction to the preceding one. I mean, duh. Trump is the anti Obama and Obama was the anti Bush.
2
Truly frightening but credible assertions.
1
Bruni gets it right with - “you never know”. Truly today’s Dem and Rep parties no longer groom and nominate candidates. The route of Geo W Bush, Barack Obama and Donald Trump demonstrate that. None came up through a long testing of legislative work or party participation. The horse race media allows anybody with some political background or a celebrity who declares presidential intentions to get immediate attention as the ‘fresh face’ regardless of skill set and track record. From there, the vitality of social media ( esp FB and Twitter ) for memes and bulletins and their own website for donation gathering keeps them peddling along.
3
To quote from Shakespeare's Henry IV,
Glendower: "I can call spirits from the vasty deep."
Hotspur: " Why, so can I, or so can any man; But will they come when you do call for them?" The same goes for the essential test of any candidate's appeal to voters.
1
Trump "won" the election by strategizing the electoral college. That's what the Democratic Party has to do to win in 2020. Hillary won by over three million votes. Figure out the electoral college.
7
"They assessed his underwhelming approval rating, factored in his combustibility and decided that if ever a sitting president looked vulnerable and if any year appeared ripe for a Democratic takeover, that president is Trump and that year is 2020."
The simplest explanation is usually correct. After the McCain and Romney spectacular failures, the vota-teriat decided, in 2016, to pick the Republican nominee. At least 6 of the the 16 would have been acceptable to the RINOists. The regular folks weren't going to have any of it.
Trump was brash, rude, unapologetic and correct. I watched his first speech and I liked it. And, like the rest of the modern world, did not think he was long for the stage. After his second rally, I was all in. His rallies got bigger. The crowds never faded. And, that holds true today.
Democrats should consider this. Who would you rather pick your candidate? DJT? Or, the Democrat Machine?
So who is the Democrat "Trump"? IDK.
1
I believe that Trump is drawing Biden into an exchange of barbs to give Biden street cred with the Democrats: If Trump thinks Biden is a threat he must be one. Trump believe that Biden would be a weak opponent and so do I. In addition to being a lightweight who twice didn't get out of the starting gate for the nomination, he's got the baggage of plagiarism and Anita Hill.
4
23 candidates.
Gives ‘23 and me’ an entirely new perspective, doesn’t it!
1
The other Trump factor is that he can make anyone look good, which encourages people who'd never consider running to jump in the race. Let's face it, I'd vote for a rabid wolverine or a foul smelling inanimate object over Trump.
5
Even though Elizabeth Warren is at the front of the picture at the beginning of this article, her whole name appears no where in this article. Her last name appears only once, lumped with other lady candidates. No discussion of her obvious qualifications for office. No discussion of her determination to get other candidates and the press talking about issues instead of personalities. Why is that?
6
Sadly, this piece fails to sufficiently blame the media for Trump and for the large number of Democratic candidates who are enjoying getting media coverage. Stop covering all the craziness — focus on policy not on grade school taunts. And don’t blame the audience. Take a leadership role and print what’s fit to print.
5
I generally enjoy your pieces, but this one is so anti-Biden through omission that I could not finish reading it. Biden IS the front runner for a reason: he is the only one who can take on Trump. It's that simple. We want someone, anyone, who can remove the current individual from the Oval Office. Once he is excised we can proceed with our wish list, with most of which most Democrats agree. Period!
2
Of course, Frank, you give a big boost to Mr. Buttigieg (inexperienced and barely old enough to run for president) in your opening paragraph.
And what a ridiculous statement about the blight of Trump picking the Democratic Party nominee.
2
All about Trump
Of course it's all about Trump! All other perils fade by comparison. I cannot imagine a greater threat to the US than another 4 years of this administration.
5
@Ron
And that is why the single most important factor should be that the next President counter the damage done by Trump and not be smart enough to just forge a new, better direction.
I disagree with this column’s perspective. The error lies in using Trump as the sole lens from which to view the 2020 race. Of course we need to pay attention what Trump does, just as we need to pay attention to any threat in our environment. We need to act intelligently to counter his autocratic behavior. But if we only pay attention to the disaster in the White House, and allow him the power to capture the bulk of our emotional energy, we weaken ourselves.
We need to support leaders who share our vision of the future, and put more energy into them than into being aware of Trump’s behavior. We need to support the Democratic candidate with the clearest vision for the future. Elizabeth Warren has everything it will take to beat Trump. She is whip smart, she has developed numerous detailed policies, she has political experience, she is warm and knows how to connect with voters, and she is verbally quick. She is not intimidated. Indeed, Trump is intimidated by her. I savor the idea of a debate between them. It won’t even be close.
I too am scared about our country's and our planet’s future. But it is a colossal mistake to allow the worst of us to frame our perspective when brighter possibilities exist. Water the plants you want to grow.
3
Strange isn't it, how people react to emergencies? They pour water on fires, they bail out leaking boats, and they oppose a know-nothing tyrant, Does FB want us to skip to the epilogue without seeing the actual play?
2
While I admire Mayor Pete and would love to see him as President, I don't think the majority of American voters would. My ticket of choice would be Joe Biden for President, Elizabeth Warren for VP and if they win, appoint Kamala Harris for Attorney General. More importantly, we need to defeat the Republicans in the Senate and maintain a majority in the House if we ever hope to erase the stain Trump has put on our country.
14
You're giving us a mix of Hegel and Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., and I don't buy it. It makes sense that the Republicans have been so successful, since they spent more that 30 years studying how to master the intricacies of the American political systems. Sure, money's part of it, but so is economic upheaval. Far more important is the ongoing eclipse of Western European Christian culture, and the re-mergence of the great imperial cultures and powers of the more southerly and easterly parts of the Eurasian land-mass. It's as if much of the last five hundred years were a blip, and an old normality is reasserting itself
In this sense, Trump is part of the push-back, the beneficiary of temporary mastery of the American political system, made possible by long-term deployment of adequate funds by those we label Republicans. It's curious that the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt followed on the cultivation of ideas with deep roots in the last third of the nineteenth and first third of the twentieth centuries. The parallels lie in achieving political success through tenacity.
It's not Trump, it's the Majority leader of the U.S. Senate. Or, the system's fine, but it occasionally produces odd-ball results. Perhaps the most interesting developments underway right now are the steady progress of the Interstate Compact movement on the one hand, and the stirring from a few decades of inactivity of possible revival of antitrust activity.
3
@John Lee Kapner
Except, of course, that any "interstate compact" to, effectively, nullify the Electoral College will result in the secession of every Red state.
@John Lee Kapner
Hear, hear.
Your comments should be the basis of an article in NYT.
The substance of the Trump presidency is to talk with reporters from Fox news and tweet about unfair life is to him. And, when he is particularly energetic, he holds a campaign rally even when an election is no where in sight. Given that he's been able to compress his presidential duties into a couple of hours per day, I imagine he will have a lot of time to continue evaluating the speaking style, sartorial choices and personality defects of all the candidates for some time to come. And, of course, time must be devoted to coming up with nicknames. Don't, however, look for anything of substance coming from Trump unless he finds the time to declare war on somebody.
11
@Susan
I hope America has outgrown having a reality TV show in the Whitehouse. I don't understand why Fox News would prefer Putin's leadership over a patriot's. The fact they promote Trump, the Russian sympathizer and puppet, baffles me.
1
It is unfortunate that with all the talent in the Democratic party, it will wasted on only one attribute---can he or she beat Trump at his own game--and that is the problem--at his own game. Yes, whoever the democratic candidate is, he or she will be playing mostly away games -- far away from a home field where policy, intelligence, and honesty matter. To this day, I believe Sec. Clinton did her best at playing in Donald's court---she won every debate and showed remarkable discipline in the face of Trump's grotesque characterizations and foreign and domestic interference with her campaign. Whoever the democrats nominate, they, like Sec. Clinton, will be playing mostly away games---my hope, is they nominee a Tom Brady like candidate, whose skills and discipline will beat Trump at his own game.
5
I don't agree with this assessment. Sure, each time there is a presidential election the incumbent is a factor, but I think Bruni is giving Trump more power than he owns and, honestly, that's part of the problem with the way politics is covered, under Trump. I'd say pay attention to Fox News for its propaganda its ability to prop up Trump. Think of that woman who was interviewed about the Mueller report, and who listened only to conservative media: she was completely buffaloed by hearing that the report didn't give Trump a complete pass. Imagine just how ramped up that media will be against any candidate who looks like she/he can defeat Trump in the upcoming election.
8
Focusing on trumps bedside manner has people missing the real issues that trump has been focused on. Those being
1. The catastrophic issues at our border
2. Fixing trade issues
3. Restoring American Competitiveness ( simpler Corp tax code, tariffs, encouraging other countries to invest in US)
4. Re-setting our relationship with China
Most of these issues weren’t even being discussed by either party in 2016 (except sanders on trade) Arguably a smart democrat could have found ways to make these democratic issues.
Reflexive hate of trump is forcing Dems into terrible positions like “open borders”, Opposing fairer trade, silence on competitiveness, and “Chinese aren’t bad guys” lingo.
There are 23 people in the field and I don’t see one that can speak well to these issues yet. Hopefully the debates will force some clarity
16
@John
1. The catastrophe at the border was created or exacerbated by the current administration. See https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/04/05/border-crisis-donald-trump-226573
2. The trade issues was created or exacerbated by the current administration. See https://www.wsj.com/articles/republican-sen-grassley-challenges-trump-on-some-trade-policies-11560513135
3. American lack of competitiveness has been exacerbated by the current administration. See https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulbledsoe/2019/04/08/america-is-losing-the-worlds-biggest-manufacturing-and-climate-race-electric-vehicles/#2d0da58d11e1
4. A chaotic China policy, largely based on blunt tariffs as opposed to strategic realignment. See https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaellewitt/2019/06/06/trumps-china-policy-simplistic-inadequate-and-harmful/#50248da12dc8
I'm pretty sure at least one or two of the 23 candidates of the Democratic party will address these issues-- Sen. Warren probably already has--but let us not forget the 44 other previous presidents who have, by and large, dutifully addressed these foreign policy issues with much more sophistication and maturity than our 45th.
7
Trump has no plans to leave any time soon. You can bet he will create a stink if he loses in 2020 and try to stay president by other means. I don't envy whoever is on the Dem ticket, it's going to be ridiculously ugly in the campaign. Good luck with all of that America.
13
As the last few days (and years) have shown, Trump does not belong anywhere near the White House. I have my choice, but will wholeheartedly support any of the 22. Any democrat who doesn’t is irresponsible and childish.
22
Like all clever con men, Trump spotted his most likely marks. He saw that there were a lot of disaffected Americans, people whose lives have remained drab and depressing, no matter which party was in power. He also saw that a lot of white people feel threatened by the noticeably increased presence of dark-skinned people.
To defeat Trump and his enablers, we need a candidate who understands the lives and concerns of the 99%, especially the working poor of all ethnicities, and who has specific ideas for lightening their burdens. We need a candidate who is willing to take on such untouchable topics as cutting the military budget and eliminating corporate welfare and using the savings for domestic needs, the corruption that occurs when corporate types buy their own errand boys and errand girls in Congress, and the ways in which business as usual is literally killing people.
We need a candidate who is willing to confront the right-wing propaganda with forthright statements of the truth and to realize that the president's job is not to avoid offending the Republicans but to communicate directly to the American people (like Reagan or FDR) about how Republican initiatives have harmed the nation and how s/he intends to encourage Congress to alleviate these problems. We need someone who knows that "bipartisanship" is often a code word for "the Democrats going along with whatever the Republicans want."
None of these desired attributes are present in Joe Biden.
2
Let's hope that it is not Trump's DNA that will linger. Instead let's hope that the new president is a successful anti body (to continue the analogy) to the toxin of Trump, that his/her presidency will be the opposite of Trump's (administered for starters instead of flying by the seats of their pants), that is principled and intelligent and honest.
2
Frank, stop it. Were it not for the media's congenital inability to ignore every shiny object tossed in the air by D.T. (1) he would not be President; and (2) he would have to be judged by the actual results of his efforts - which are an utter failure, rather than the image he seeks to project. If he is determining his opponent in 2020, it is only because the Fourth Estate has bought his narrative - hook, line and sinker. Ignore the tweets, ignore the bombast, and if God forbid he takes over the 4th of July at the Lincoln Memorial I have a suggestion: don't even cover it. Trump abhors a vacuum: without the 'oxygen' afforded by publicity, his fire goes out. Just keep reporting what a mess Betsy DeVos' Education Department is making of public schools, how Trump's tax 'reform' has left the middle class in the lurch, what a mess the trade war is making of our economy - especially our farm economy, how the coddling of dictators and strongmen has made the world less safe, how China and Russia are winning because of our withdrawal and failure to engage (think TPP, Iran Nuclear Deal, Paris Climate Accord). Never mention his name and he will implode. Oh, and every day print another page or two of the Mueller Report, page one above the fold. By the time the conventions roll around, every American will have read it in its entirety. He who must not be named will go down in flames.
29
@G. James you correctly blame the media for reacting to everything Pres. Trump says (or tweets). "Don't take the bait" is the best advice - to the media and the 23 candidates. However, DO NOT ignore (or distort) Trump's accomplishments. Your list of "failures" do not reflect reality - just hatred. The Dem nominee better be able to proposed better solutions or this contest is over before it begins.
1
@G. James
Yes, the media tosses the shiny objects, but we are fooled by them too. (I'm included because I just finished reading Bruni's piece and am responding to a response instead of researching candidates' policy positions.) I agree that we need more and unrelenting reporting of facts - not opinions.
1
Whoever survives this quantlet will face a barrage of hate and snotty one liners which Trump delivers masterfully. This person will have to be bursting with energy and incredible thick skinned. This slate of hopefuls will be culled out like all other primaries. Trump is still his own worst enemy. This will be one heckuva an election.
2
Trying to be the candidate who can dump more insults on Trump than anyone else is a mistake. Trump is truly an awful president. But many people don't really seem to see that (or care). Instead, I would recommend running on a simple message:
We are ALL in this TOGETHER.
We have wasted a lot of time fighting against ourselves. Trump openly attacks large chunks of Americans every day. People want to belong to something meaningful. He implicitly tells them that half the people in America are their enemies. That's never going to help anyone. Instead, for better or worse, no matter who we are...we are in this together. Despite our differences we have a lot in common. We should build those things and remind each other that even the people we are arguing with love their kids and worry about many of the same things. We are in this together.
4
Frank Bruni makes an excellent point about the president's bizarre conduct driving the Democratic campaign. Like millions of Americans, I find his shallowness and narcissism appalling, but worry that it will influence Democrats too much: what if by making the campaign all about backlash, Democrats squander the opportunity to offer a credible alternative to voters?
Before reading this column, I heard two news stories. First, US-Iran tensions are rising because the president abrogated the Obama administration's deal with Iran. All parties agreed that Iran was complying with the agreement, so the president couldn't take "yes" for an answer. American sanctions are hurting ordinary Iranians while their leaders bristle and bluster. The president threatens Iran with the geopolitical equivalent of "I will end you," then says he doesn't want war and speculates cluelessly about whether Iran's leaders will call him. His blundering diplomacy with North Korea has produced nothing, but he blathers on about his love for Kim Jong Un like an average North Korean brainwashed by the regime's propaganda.
The second story was about the president giving a green light to foreigners to meddle in our elections. He might as well admit that Vladimir Putin is playing a ventriloquist making a show of our elections and he's Putin's dummy.
Voters have to tune out the constant noise of Trump's idiocy and focus on the damage he's doing, not just to America, but to the whole world.
8
"But Trump will out-and-out sire his successor. Even if he leaves the White House shortly after November 2020, his DNA will linger."
One more reason, this cosmic joke can't - must not - be allowed to live longer. In the rest of the free world - for whom the US became responsible, the moment its policies started affecting so much of our destiny - we're laughed out... really. It's not funny anymore. One more time we're counting on you!! This time to wake up and shape up. Thank you so much for all you did 75 years ago. Please don't let it go to waste.
2
Trump is old and won’t be around forever and I think his mind is deteriorating at about the same rate as his hair. Meanwhile my prayer is that whoever claws their way to the top can certainly and completely finish this corrupt joke of a President off in a win the likes of the blue wave of 2018. I must have confidence in the American people to stop this nonsense in 2020.
3
At this point it's okay to have Biden out there attacking Trump, but he should not be the nominee; he's too old-school for that, and even his attack-dog stance is not enough to drive more (and younger) voters to the polls. I agree with those who advocate getting the two dozen candidates together for a serious discussion about who can best provide us with a path forward on domestic and international issues. Then get the rest of them to run for the Senate, the House, or the Statehouse, whichever is the best fit. It's crucial that Democrats end up in the WH and controlling the Senate. I don't have a favorite myself, but I strongly believe one of the women candidates would "be best."
1
@HB If you think any of the 217 candidates are going to concede anything just to beat Trump, you are sorely mistaken.
They have books to write/sell, fundraising dependent upon their national stature, and are each setting themselves up for a 2024 candidacy when Trump leaves office on his own terms.
If I were a smart Democrat, I would do this for the candidates...and tell them none of them has the experience, moxie, gravitas or Anti-Establishment credentials to beat Trump...but one.
Howard Schultz...and the AltLeftTwitterMafia has already threatened Starbucks boycotts if he runs.
He should run as a Democrat, but the Democrat Party today looks like the party of Hugo Chavez. Schultz has a point...if you go too far to the left as a party..you fall off the cliff and nothing changes.
Schultz is the ONLY one with Left Center ideals and experience and the ability to sell himself as an outsider who can beat Trump.
Or...wait until 2024 when you'll then have 385 candidates for the D nomination.
Turns out all those Silicon Valley Billionaires are cool writing million dollar checks if they get a picture with their favorite Presidential candidate.
After Trump, things can never be the same. Forget standards of civility, forget about truth and honor. The game is on and it's gonna be ugly. I found myself rooting for Julian Castro as I read about his comments during a FOX town hall presentation. Somebody has to rise up and just punch the Bully in the nose. You know we're all waiting for it. At the same time, the Democratic party must take a good, hard look at some of its weaknesses: identity politics, immigration reform, healthcare, and climate change. Democrats need solid proposals and solid numbers to give the American people some hope. We need a positive campaign with actual well-thought out proposals that all Americans can agree with. I love Buddha Judge, but Warren, thus far carries the experience and gravitas that even older Americans would go for.
4
"Everything is a response to him (Trump)...." No! Bernie Sanders has been walking the talk long before Trump. He has a record of action and ideas that are a response to looking at the lives of Americans and working to make those lives better.
3
And for at least the next ten years the Dems, and most of America, will try to keep authoritarians out of office. But, the US electorate has a short memory and in the near future, there will likely be another Trump.
1
Never underestimate the power of conservative strategists, who always play the long game while tacticians on both sides parry and thrust to take up time until after the primaries.
Debates may tell us something, but only if they are held -- Trump may well decline, which will be a relief to GOP helmsmen. Then watch the headlines as the surprises pop up from all over the US and the world, increasing as Nov. 3 approaches.
Trump doesn't necessarily drive election history except as he is allowed to. Nor can we count on Democrats and their ultimate nominees to stay ahead of the deadly strategic game.
It's been GOP strategists who excel at making the best of whatever is at hand -- regardless of its appalling nature, from dross to treason -- to maintain the greatest stranglehold on power. It's a strategy that holds populism and oligarchy in nearly invincible balance -- and that game itself is the abiding prize.
6
Thanks you for saying so clearly what a lot of us suspect: the Democrats are simply playing into Trump's hands, and (as a corollary) he's likely to mop the floor with any of them. It's my party, and I'll cry if I want to.
6
It seems to me our President is never more authentic sounding than when he is accusing someone of being a 'loser'. Here in superbowl country, winning isn't everything, it is the only thing. And all is fair.
Now I think there is also a perception that a sort of rainbow coalition mentality is committed to the marginalized, at least professedly. Marginalized is a fifty cent word, many rely on 'losers'. Some of the richest people in the country sincerely believe they have done much to alleviate their distress.
Concurrent with that, according to a Times report, people who contributed to Social Security their working life now face the possibility of a 20 per cent reduction in the monthly check. That would be the beginning.
Crafty as it might have been, Trump convinced enough people that he heard them above the voices insisting that America was not a great place to make a life for yourself. And love covers a multitude of sins.
If the hunger for decency can prevail over the anger of being ignored, some enlightened Democrat might slip in. I still dream that it is more likely an enlightened Republican could steal the Presidency.
As noted in other posts, removing Trump is the only objective. And while I find the more liberal D candidates more appealing, the Party must nominate the candidate most likely to win. They must remember that America has never had a woman, or a LGBTQ individual, or a member of the Jewish faith in the White House. While we desperately need to break those barriers, now is not the time. Unless he steps on his tongue in the next year, Joe Biden has the best chance to defeat Trump. The best ticket would be Biden/Booker.
2
Could be why Pete plays the LGBTQ card in a shrewd way - sort of, “oh, and I just happen to be gay”.
On the outside change that trump loses in 2020 the democrat whoever that might be would still most likely have McConnell and company to deal with, the supreme court and perhaps even the house of representatives to deal with.
So forget any change even if the Dems win.
The change is that what Republicans are doing will stop. That is a change.
3
I wish that the DNC or the Democratic hopefuls themselves would get in a room and determine the two or three candidates most likely to beat Donald Trump. Put their egos and their aspirations aside for the good of the country and maximize the chances that the Democrats put forward someone whose character and integrity are unassailable and who can make Trump look like the reptile he is and defeat him soundly in 2020. All the others can work on the policies that the party will propose and the Democrat who wins can appoint the other previous candidates to work in his/her administration.
12
"But Trump will out-and-out sire his successor. Even if he leaves the White House shortly after November 2020, his DNA will linger."
Trump will not sire his successor, the 44+% of Americans who fervently share his views will.
Now that conservative America has found that they can not only elect a president but also have a, so-called, "trifecta" consisting of control of state legislatures and governorships in the majority of states, Trump now only serves to drive the Democrat's fury.
Come January 2021, the US Senate will still be Trumpian Republican as will the lead in the Republican trifectas in states.
The reality for Democrats is that among their gaggle of candidates there is no one clear voice of leadership because Democrats are composed of so many different constituencies, all struggling to lead a party that resists leading.
Obama was successful because he had limited political experience (no need to explain anything), a vision (Hope) that no one could argue against or even about and a terrific smile. A marketer's dream. Not one of the Democratic contenders share even some of these qualities. They each distinguish themselves by the length of their baggage train.
The depressing reality today is that if the economy stays relatively strong and unemployment stays low Trump will win in 2020 because that's how Americans have voted for some time.
1
Eugene Robinson had a good column in the Wapo. The gist of which was there are too many good people running. A better strategy would be to have some redirected to Senate contests.All the effort going into a presidential run will be wasted.
We need the control of the WH, the Senate, and the House.
Mr. Perez, or someone, should bang a few heads to futher the big picture.
16
Let’s not give Donald Trump too much credit. Nothing he says or does will determine who will be the Democratic nominee to run in 2020.
Trump is now an inert lump, because we all have seen his act too many times. His only influence on the selection of his Democratic opponent is passive.
The nominee needs only possess one required attribute. To win the Democratic nomination and the general election, he or she needs only to be someone other than Donald Trump.
1
The Democratic Party lacks a strategic plan, and this is heartbreaking. Who is running against Mitch McConnell and other critical members of the Senate? This must be part of the plan. We hear little about these critical races, and this, too, is a result of those unseen forces that nominated Trump. Even legitimate media promotes Trumpism by giving him so much attention. It is a vicious cycle. The public must understand how Trump came to be nominated in order to understand know who is behind him. Where are the investigative reporters? The second critical question legitimate media should explore is why elections are so close, all of a sudden. This is beyond mere gerrymandering. Why do some candidates win by only one vote or small numbers of votes in so many states? This is statistically curious but seems to be the new norm. Have the rules of probability changed, or did voting become tainted? Trump did not rise like a phoenix, he was allowed to be nominated, and we still do not know why. If his nomination was due to "small state" Republican Committees, who are on these committees, and why did they choose Trump over someone with qualifications, like a John Kasich or a Jeb Bush? No Democrat can win if the elections are unfair.
14
How the nominee is selected is inside baseball; nobody in the DNC leadership, the people who pick the nominee, care what the Democratic electorate thinks. Remember what happened with Clinton, Sanders, Wassermann Schultz and Brazile in 2016. I agree with those who say the system is broken.
5
@Thomas
But they fixed the system by eliminating the bloc of “super-delegates” , leaving the nominee to be chosen by straight-up primary results.
2
You want to know what scares me? It's this - several Democratic candidates are presenting detailed analyses of our issues, and proposing well thought out plans to address them. But the media coverage pays them little attention, preferring the ratings-boosting circus instead. America desperately needs leadership, and our citizens need to put down the devices, turn off social media, and pay attention. That is precisely what scares me, because it isn't going to happen. That's what Trump knows too, and he plays it like a Stradivarius.
59
@Michael I agree. The media. the "enemy of the people" according to Trump, may be a major player in reelecting Trump. Not only does the media fail to cover the policies of major Democratic candidates, the media continues, at every opportunity, to give Trump a platform to spew his lies. I find it particularly galling that reporters are always present to ask Trump questions every time he appears on the White House lawn on his way to his waiting helicopter. Few, if any, of his lies are challenged by the press, but he gets another opportunity to tell them. Ignore the man. Please!
32
As long as we're breaking old rules, let's run four candidates against their two. Imagine if any combination of Biden, Harris, Buttigieg and Warren ran for POTUS, Veep, Secretary of State and Senate Majority Leader (the latter two obviously provisional). All four on the campaign trail, getting media coverage and tweeting. A groundbreaking pile-on for which the tactic is the story dominating the news coverage as much as the candidates (and "candidates") themselves. Why not?
7
@James. Because it would split the democratic vote and Trump would win.
I don’t think 2020 is 2016. That was when so many of us held our noses and voted for the least liked Democratic candidate that was thrust on us Hillary Clinton. If ever we had a candidate who thought she was so entitled to
The job it was her. And the Democratic Party succumbed to her. I am certain that the process if it had been fair would have allowed for a far better candidate to emerge. But the Democratic Party used its muscle and power to make sure she was the candidate. So many of us held our noses and voted for her. And so
many of us just stayed home because we could not bear to get another corrupt Clinton in . The Clinton Foundation ( which interestingly has all but disappeared after all those years of espousing the good that they were doing!!??) case in point. 2020 is clearly a referendum
On what we want as nation and I have no doubt we will have a candidate that will speak to most of us. I do not want a race or gender lens to decide the best candidate. I want a candidate who can win . I want a candidate who is genuine and can get in the trenches and fight. I want a candidate people
like. So let the games begin and let us not get into the politically correct game of gender and ethnic pickings. Let us find a candidate who actually can get the voters motivated and can actually win. This coming from a minority female voter
17
@Tinnie grewal Love your comment, thinking exactly along these lines. HRC was a horrible candidate, and I voted for her holding my nose....... Such a pitiful state of affairs. Yes, the candidate who appeals to all Americans would be absolutely perfect. Agree 100 %
Don't be ridiculous Bruni. Yes of course finding a very different alternative to Trump is a major motivation for many people and the fear of a Trump re-election has heightened the idea of electability. But otherwise Democratic voters will choose their candidate based on what they like.
"He (Biden) called Trump “an existential threat.” How many Americans can define 'existential'? Percentage wise my guess is less than five percent. That statement and Bruni's quoting it show two people who are clueless about life in American and defeating Trump. When 'Existential' become a brand of automatic weapon, it will be understood generally.
8
@stewart bolinger
Would it be multiple choice or an essay question? Regardless of the Philosophy 102 definition, most people would take it to mean our very existence is at stake but why would they believe it?
It should not be overlooked that both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders achieved the success they did in 2016. Together, they received more primary votes than any other single candidate. It was a politically lethal calculus for Hillary Clinton.
Trump and Sanders both spoke to and, in return, received support from millions and millions of Americans who are fed up with business as usual in Washington and feel overlooked by a government which has been hijacked by special interests, corporations and wealthy Americans.
Whether any one of the myriad 2020 Democratic wannabes is able to break through and seize control of this alienation is an open question. At this point, however, it seems clear that Donald Trump is running the table. Unless enough American voters come to the not-so-startling conclusion that he is tilting it, too, and not in their interests, he may well end up being returned to office, making it ever more difficult for any of the Democratic challengers to oust him.
Ladies and gentlemen, place your bets. The horse race is about to begin, and most, if not all of the horses, will lose.
4
Biden's tactic of most literally running against Trump rather than for the American people will be his downfall--and America's. All Biden will do is reengage Trump's base and get too many others to believe Trump is being unfairly attacked.
Warren is on the right track--policy; Buttigieg is on the right track when he tacks around the media's 'gotcha questions.' Both Warren and Buttigieg in my opinion have the best tools and tactics to unseat POTUS.
22
@james
While Biden might not be my first choice, he will certainly not rile up trump’s base anymore than they have been riled up since June, 2015 when he walked down that staircase and put his lifelong assault on decency into overdrive.
trump will win the red states over anyone but trump, Anyone but trump will win the blue states over trump. Thus, although it may sound melodramatic, the fate of the world rests on the purple states. I won’t name names, but the Democratic candidate who can best inspire voters there would be my choice.
6
@RickyDick
I'd vote for Biden or anything the DNC nominates; I'd prefer several others. Biden is GOP-light--too moderate for me.
Why aren't democrats getting together to decide on a strategy. It seems they are all over the place, all anti-Trump to be sure, but still far too individualistic. They should forget about Trump and run as the Republicans have done, staying together no matter how appalling their leader is.
4
The premise of this opinion is true that the sitting President will frame the debate over his/her second term. This is always true and not news. What is different this time is that the fight will be about the power of personalities rather than substance simply because Trump has no substance. Trump will be very difficult to beat because he will excoriate the very existence of his competitor. It will take one tough cookie to withstand his constant belittling and an enlightened electoral majority to defeat him.
8
It ultimately comes down to the person, not the categories she or he falls into. The defeat of Hillary Clinton was due to the successful focus on controlling the perception of her character, regardless of truth (of course). The primaries are also determined by character, not policy. This is our world, like it or not (not). Look at the viable candidates that trump doesn’t mention (yet) because these are the ones he—and his election machine—fear. Harris is his nightmare because he can only undermine her with race and gender, while she rips him to pieces. His attacks on her will only work with his (white male) support and will repulse the majority. I’d think Pelosi knows this, and her preference for a sound (crushing) defeat over impeachment is the only way to recover from the current free fall of this democracy.
7
What has given us this large field is generational turnover in the Democratic Party. Seems positively democratic to me, but the boys and girls on the bus do not like it and want it narrowed so they can talk horse race- exactly like every other election.
2
I grew up with Joe Biden and respect him tremendously. A few miles from my childhood home, his life was unalterably changed by a car accident that took the lives of his wife and child and injured his son. He'd just been elected to Congress, but he soldiered on and managed to move forward in his life and his commitment to the people of Delaware.
Now, he must do the same for the good of the democratic party and move aside for the next generation. I know its age discrimination but unlike selective bias, aging affects us all and part of growth is moving aside and allowing the next generation to take over.
13
You may love Buttigieg as you did Hillary, but it would seem that Hillary motivates both the left like AOC and Biden more than Trump. The article's premise is cute, but the reality is hysteria and self-promotion - the same cause that put Trump into the Republican race 3 years ago, the ego- money mix. And the promise to a big rewars even after losing.
The result is a group of people spouting the same domestic pie in the sky about health, wealth, and welfare little or no international stature, competence or understanding.
There is a childlike quality to the entire scene and if it didn't matter to the world and this country it would be a fun game. It does matter and its signifigance is what it says, not about Trump, but about the death of democracy.
As Hillary still controls the DNC via Perez we will again have the choice between two totally grotesquely incompetent people.
The cause cannot be so lightly laid off on Trump. We need to look at what we all have done to ourselves.
4
For his constituents, Trump is winning on the economy, winning on immigration, winning on abortion, and winning on foreign relations, even if in some cases the wins are more style than substance. I think that will be hard to beat with policy, intellect and personality. So far, only Biden can match Trump on charisma and familiarity; that’s why he is in the lead.
4
Democrats are in a tough spot. The economy is booming; there is little unemployment; prices are still low. That forces them to run on Trump's personality and character, rather than the damage he is doing to the country.
4
@Subhash Garg
The real economy is not booming.
8
@Subhash Garg Would nobody point out that the economy's booming now because Obama stabilised it after the last Republican fiscal vandalism?
1
Trump did not make America what it is, he is the product of the past 50 years or more. Since Lyndon B Johnson took us into Vietnam neck deep without assuring that the nation was behind him, there have fewer and fewer flashes of promise in our land. Those who benefit from this situation are either setting the course or profiting from it: a) elected and appointed federal officials, and b) the press. But we all rationalize this situation away on the certain knowledge of our own moral superiority.
6
The Rump will pick the Democratic candidate just like Hillary Clinton picked the Republican one in 2016 — defeating her was so certain to Republicans that dozens of candidates came out of the woodwork. The same reason is why there are now so many Democratic candidates—they have no doubt The Rump will be defeated. The only question is whether Russia will be satisfied with continuing to sow discord or whether Putin will decide to stick with his ill-gotten gain. He’s the most successful enemy so far at destroying American greatness.
14
What Trump lacks: Human decency, moral integrity, strategic skills, long range vision, high intelligence, executive competence, diplomacy, capacity for empathy, and basic command of the English language. If desiring these for our next President is a reaction to Trump — I am delighted!
47
With the misstep of commenting on receiving political advice on an opponent from a foreign power as well as other unsettling behavior, perhaps it's time for supporters of the President to hear the wisdom of old: "It is better to have a wise enemy than a reckless friend."
An "unguided missile" can be dangerous to both friend and foe.
12
Yes, Trump can be identified as a causal factor in how DEM candidates have shaped their messages because Trump is indeed an existential threat to our country and beating him is far away the most important thing — far more important that the nuanced differences of emphasis among the DEM candidates on on public policy. Not sure this is that big of an insight. The most recent Quinnipiac poll has Biden beating Trump nationwide by 13. This after a poll, perhaps a month ago, has Biden beating Trump by 11 in PA. Uncle Joe may not be our most exciting or transformative candidate, but, in this moment, he seems to be our best one.
17
We watch the news every day and fear the country cannot fully recover from the virus infecting it. What can innoculate us?
The 2016 election showed to the world the underlying weakness of U.S. democracy, despite its Constitution and Bill of Rights. We were once a role model for the world, but now are a warning to the world.
The Trump effect is far-reaching. Because his presidency is so atrocious it may be easier for even a mediocre Democratic candidate to be supported by millions as almost a saint. To beat Trump, the opponent just has to be a little bit better, to win the fierce loyalty of millions.
So we'll save ourselves from the worst, but be thankful for a mediocre new normal? Our standards are distorted.
Bruni's right--- "Trump obliterated normal circumstances."
Bruni and Blow's columns today are about voter attitudes in the campaign.
But we need columns analyzing some policies the candidates are proposing? You know, like pros and cons, who they will affect and how they'll work? Is there a NYT ban on that for opinion columnists?
Does any columnist dare to compare ways of financing health care for all---that might have a chance for progress in 2020?
24
@Meredith
Just about any Democrat would be better because he or she would at least be a decent person. That alone would be a big upgrade. But I disagree that any of these candidates are mediocre. Some are better than others but I think any of them could rise to the challenge. Well maybe a few couldn’t.
I disagree: The best explanation for the size of the Democratic Presidential field of candidates is not Trump but the new rules of American politics, namely the fragmentation of control over funding and media access. Simply, it is far more favorable calculation for any old pol to decide to mount a national campaign than it was a decade ago, with greater potential for boosting ones name and tapping fundraising streams, with significantly lesser political costs.
Previously, before Citizens United (2010), party insiders exercised greater control over the flow of funds to national candidates - who could vie for PAC funding. Simultaneously, before Google eclipsed the newspaper industry in ad revenue (c. 2004) and before Facebook took over the distribution of news from the TV networks and top national newspapers (2012), the editorial directors of top networks and newspapers exercised more control over which candidates were covered or not and how extensively.
The changes in campaign finance and the media industry have destroyed the gatekeepers who limited the number of candidates in the race and favored older, more conventionally experienced politicians who held and followed a shared set of norms.
Trump is a result of these changes, too, but a symptom not a cause. Rather, the change in political rules - the destruction of the gatekeepers- is the reason for the explosion of the Democratic field. Look deeper, man - and tell us that story!
16
Trump is not some sort of genius, but rather a force of nature powerful enough to make itself the focus of all attention and the environment for all political happenings. He is an ongoing political hurricane, and we have not yet figured out how to deal with him, especially since the forces he embodies will still be around after he is gone.
We have learned to somewhat deal with forces of nature, but we must remember that we cannot do so by reasoning with them. Generally we look for ways to arrange that their natural tendencies will serve our purposes. In the case of Trump and his Trumpsters, we are still at a loss.
8
Average American here. I don't view Trump as a sun god presidential candidates need to orbit, but I like the idea that his awfulness means goodness will follow.
My blue votes in a red state haven't counted in presidential elections. November 2020 could be a breakthrough. Trump's that bad; let Congressional hearings and the media make it clear. We could stand repeats of main points from the Mueller report in declarative sentences. It's meaty. We're underfed.
Candidates have to show their own winning ways rather than reactions to Trump's daily outrageousness. There's a lot to like among the 23 running, though none seem as broadly appealing as two non-candidates, Sherrod Brown and the never-mentioned Chris Coons, two Democrats who I think could attract traditionally red voters in purple and perhaps even red states.
As an average voter speaking to Democratic candidates, I like to see policies backed by records, and characters proven trustworthy, not overly driven by ego and polls. Only experienced need apply. Must exhibit familiarity with and faithfulness to the Constitution (fairly standard among Democrats).
19
@Sally
retired federal attorney F/70 FL voter
Never heard of Steven Bullock, Democrat TWO TERM Governor of very Red Montana, until he was on Rachel Maddow's interview.
Your preferences are mine, with Governors usually superior to Members of Congress for our top job: "backed by records, characters proven trustworthy, not overly driven ego." Bullock brought core Democrats' priorities to very Red State residents: Medicaid for 9% of his poor adults + legislating against dark money/character stand + protecting public lands against tRump's deeding them to cronies.
He also rarely changes his cowboy boots and work jeans. That last may get hm into white male Rust Belt zip codes needed to win E.C. in 2020?
I sent Bullock campaign money after Maddow's Interview. I sent his campaign more money after Dem trolls setting and shifting arbitrary rules excluded him from this months' debates.
This man needs to be heard because he meets your requirements and mine for a proven leader anchored in lawful behavior and Democrats' highest priority issues.
10
@n.c.fl
Steve Bullock is one of the few candidates who can actually beat Trump, and the DNC is shooting itself and the country in the foot by not allowing him into the first debate. He entered late because he was doing his job finishing up a highly successful session where he got substantive things accomplished for Montana. So he doesn't yet have the visibility of other candidates. But he's not allowed in and Bill DeBlasio is? It seems the DNC and the media have picked their favorites, the flashy ones, most of whom have no real chance of being elected, cutting out those who might win. I'm sending Bullock money and will continue to do so. It isn't over yet, I hope.
4
The two-dozen candidates are not much of a problem. Six or seven will be gone before the first primary. Another dozen or so won't survive beyond Iowa and New Hampshire. Having four or five viable candidates coming around the far turn and into the home stretch will assure vitality and interest in something other than Donald next year this time. May the best woman win!
5
I think Elizabeth Warren is the perfect foil for President Trump because she is an expert on bankruptcy law and he is a serial bankruptee. A match made in heaven.
But on a more serious note, Donald Trump is a con man who plays a politician who cares about working class Americans. Elizabeth Warren is the real deal. She has a track record of advocating for ordinary Americans that is decades long - her books, her fight against the bankruptcy bill that credit card companies favored, her creation of a Consumer Financial Protection Agency to protect against predatory lending practices like the kind that resulted in the financial collapse.
She saw what was happening to middle class Americans and wrote about it and testified about it and spoke to journalists about it and finally ran for office about it.
And for me it's not just about defeating Trump. It's about defeating the Republican stranglehold on the terms of debate about gov't and it's role.
157
For 45 years, through Republican and Democratic administrations, working families have seen their purchasing power fall (as measured by total wages as a percentage of GDP). As a result of the rise of monopolies, a significant and growing portion of working families are now struggling to provide shelter and food on the table and our politics has become increasingly polarized and radicalized.
Trump’s ability to gain political traction is a symptom of this growing menace to our democracy, our way of life and our human rights. Our last chance to save our noble democratic experiment is to elect a third Roosevelt in 2020 along with a Democratic House and Senate followed by elimination of the filibuster. Then we can quickly provide relief to struggling working families and restore the unity of a new political center.
It is the political pressure of struggling families, not Trump, who will determine our choice of Democratic nominee.
12
I'm not sure I understand the point of this Op-Ed by Frank. Generally speaking I agree with him on political matters and I surely like the way he started this article by recognizing how talented and forthright Pete Buttigieg is. But of course the point of this article isn't to extol Pete's accomplishments. I THINK Frank is trying to say that Trump has so permanently changed the political landscape of this country that the Democratic candidates are no longer playing by previous political rules in running for the nomination. Of course the COUNTRY will never be the same again and nothing that "was" can ever be taken for granted in this country going forward, including expecting that politicians will respect for the rule of law and be held accountable when they break it. Then mentioning Biden representing the past which was brighter than the present - I DO understand that point and agree with it because Biden DOES look tired to me and yet of course I'll support him if he's the nominee. So I'm not sure what I was supposed to take-away from this article because it didn't really shed any new light, to me, on the current political situation in this country.
6
Any bloat and ill-tenor that exists within the now very large field of Democrat contenders is entirely of their own making. I recall the 2008 Democrat primary season being similarly raucous with a field that included a young Barack Obama and a then-old Joe Biden along with Hillary Clinton. I believe it was Biden who said the Oval Office was no place for on the job training, even though Biden did find Obama to be 'bright, clean, and articulate'.
Democrats have a big field today for only two reasons. First, the Party still cannot get over its stinging 2016 defeat. Second, Trump blew away all preconceived notions about what a POTUS candidate should be, thereby opening future candidate fields to a wide array of choices.
The public should be grateful actually to have a diverse range of views. Too, moderates & independents have certainly had their eyes opened. Given how far left and frankly bizarre many of the Democrat candidates are, the true nature of today's Democrat Party has been revealed.
5
Me. Bruni's article might turn to be prophetic of another four Trump years. It illustrates the dismal and disorganized state of a Democratic Party with 20-odd candidates (someone called a circus) without an unifying platform based on real issues of concern to most Americans, other than their visceral hate for Trump. One would think they have not recovered from losing the last election. While they are arguing and discrediting one another, Trump is focusing on winning the next election, bringing his message of a Trump Doctrine that is appealing to many Americans, not just his "base", but independents as well (me) who find his handling of the economy, immigration reform, trade and foreign affairs more in tune with their idea of good government. Probably most voters will cast a vote based on those issues alone.
6
@Mephistopheles, most voters believe that a mendacious, lying, lawbreaking demagogue eroding democracy by the day is "more in tune with their idea of good government"? If you're right than this country is finished.
2
we can pontificate about the 2020 elections as much as we want.
as long as our election system is broken - ( voting suppression, gerrymandering, failed technical framework( Florida chads anyone ?!), and many more anti free voting hurdles erected by the Republicans)- our democracy will not only remain in the shambles that it is - it'll get worse. so much worse indeed that it'll make the founding fathers return, to re- write the constitution and teach us a few lessions of civility, and other areas in which we are badly lacking.
6
I think if we are going to restore our legislature, we must
defeat Mitch McConnell....and those who would block any
Democrat who beats Trump in 2020.
Beat Mitch McConnell and the rest of the phony Republicans and then our democracy will have a chance
of survival...
Also,...
I am looking forward to the GOP Primary when Trump's
challenger former Governor of Massachusetts Bill Weld
will most likely take Trump down to size.
21
Any random person on the street could do a better job as president than Trump. At a minimum he or she would listen to advice.
No wonder the Democratic field is so crowded.
11
It's great there are so many candidates, and they are focused on issues. Trump is marginalizing himself and allowing us to fight it out on issues. That is healthy. The Democratic candidates will sort themselves out in time.
7
@annabellina- i like the fact that Bruni highlighted Buttigieg's obvious bright intellect. lets hope it'll swey a few open- minded voters to vote for him.
When Trump announced he was running for office I started reading the news for the first time in my adult life. Each day, I expected to see him shrink off the front page; thanks to you guys, he did not, and he went on to win the election -- our choices and the entire conversation driven primarily by the news media -- not by this fella who can (it turns out) barely fashion a legible Tweet, much less press release.
Trump will only drive the selection of his opponent to the extent that you allow him too. I'm begging you: this time, don't do it.
33
There's a lot of sense to what you're saying, and in the USA, practically every election cycle is a referendum on the last one anyway. But if the Democratic battle last time around had been between Warren and Biden, if they'd chosen to run in 2016, however that would have come out, would the conversation really be the same now? It's not just the Fact of Trump that's determined where we are.
4
“On stylistic and even substantive grounds, Trump is arguably exerting more gravitational pull on Democratic politics than the party’s most recent president, Barack Obama.”
I wish it was that simple. It isn't merely Trump, it is the approximately 40% of potential voters who knowing all that we know about Trump's appalling failings and misconducts still approve of his presidency. It isn't Trump who is driving a potentially existential crisis, but this chasm between the notions of what our country stands for. Frankly, i am not unduly concerned that Democrats are horrified and energized by Trump's outrages. I would be more concerned if they weren't.
22
@Partha Neogy- that 40 % who voted for Trump would be rendered insignificant if the popular vote would be the law of the land.
abolish the electoral college !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
3
Ironically, Trump is only one man, and his victory was basically a fluke. There is no Trump Party or Trump Doctrine, although GOP conservatives may try to adapt more sophisticated versions of his platform. His one signal achievement may be to drive the Democratic Party establishment off the deep end. It will take them years to recover.
6
"[T]he congested field is suffocating qualified aspirants who would otherwise find oxygen." Indeed, within the scrimmage is someone who can pull off unseating Trump (and I don't think it's Biden, who is peaking too early and has too much baggage), but we're having trouble seeing the forest for the trees. Ideally, some of the lower-level aspirants should see that their individual campaigns are hopeless and align themselves with others who are offering the same or similar positions. Maybe its too much to hope that Di Blasio or Beto or Williamson or several other "who?"s will walk away and do the right thing before the first circus - I mean, debate - but some of them need to so that we can focus on the electable folks in this pack.
But does this mean that Trump "sires his successor"? Only that the successor will be (hopefully) very different - literate, articulate, service-directed, personable, genuine, honest, all the things that Trump isn't and never was or could be. A Democratic successor would be president of all the people, not just a minority base. So I wouldn't use the term "sire." "Serving as an antidote to Trump" would be more to the point, in my opinion.
5
Even if Trump loses, he'll still be out there doing rallies, getting his adoring fans to cast a poisonous view of whatever the new President is doing.
Meanwhile for the here and now, I wish the speaker would make sure all the candidates agreed to take in various platform positions—in order for the final candidates to embrace a lot of ideas and solutions, to appeal to more than 50 percent of the country. If they just fight and bicker and talk about impeachment... I'm tellin ya that is NOT the winning strategy. In the end people really DO want the hopey-changey candidate. So they need to get on that.
4
Mr. Bruni, I thought you made some good points. Having said that, I wonder what you think of those of us who put highest priority on defeating the incumbent? The current president has shaped my way of seeing the race. I hope for so many things for our country, but none are within view if the incumbent wins another term. By the way, I am focused not only on possible candidates, but the messages that they need to talk about. Which candidates? Which message? That's what some Americans will need to win over more Americans.
3
you weren't this nauseating when you wrote about food, Mr. Bruni. Trump is like that Chinese streetfood treat, scorpion on a skewer, only live instead of grilled. instead of guessing about how Trump will determine which Democrat is nominated to run against him, let's focus on what it will take to motivate Democrats to get out and vote for the eventual nominee. Obama earned and deserved great popularity, but the black voters turned out in force for one of their own, and were practically glowing with pride when he was elected. which of the Democratic candidates is going to turn out such an enthusiastic and important block? will it be someone who has strong bona fides and great policies, or someone voters can identify with and be proud of? is it about choosing the best candidate, or is it a popularity contest?
5
Franks Bruni is so right, but I'd put it a slightly different way: it's the Democrats' hatred of Trump, not Trump himself, that is driving this election.
7
@PL- how do u mean "hatred of Trump, not Trump himself,". isn't it one and the same !?
@amir burstein -- No. One is the person. The other is the corrosive, obsessive, reflexive, rationality-destroying impluse that has seized so many Americans since the person uttered his first misquoted words when he announced his candidacy.
Saying Trump will pick the nominee is true in the sense that the path of tornado determines the course of the emergency relief. Voters want someone who can undo the mean spirited ignorance of this administration and begin to offer relief to everyone suffering under it.
14
Sorry, I had to vomit after reading this. Not because you’re wrong necessarily but because we’re a nation acting like a deer caught in the headlights of an oncoming tragedy in the shape of the 2020 election.
5
Every Democrat running for the presidency has to contend with one looming fact: White men, particularly non college educated ones, are lost to the Democratic Party for the foreseeable future. They have been lost because the Democrats demonized them as irredeemably bigoted. But they are by far the biggest voting bloc in the country. To counter their demographic heft, the Democrats need to somehow drive a wedge between White men and White women while retaining the support of Blacks, formerly the biggest voting bloc. That would be a tricky act in the best of times. It’s exponentially more difficult now because the radical left wing of the party, safely ensconced in deep blue states, is intensifying the identity politics that drove Whites out of the Democratic Party in the first place.
Trump looms over the Democrats because they recognize that he is an existential threat to their party. If Democrats can’t forge a new coalition to counter the new White bloc their identity politics have created, they are toast for a generation.
Trump is a symptom, not a cause. He was the first to recognize the simmering resentment that identity politics has created among Whites. I think most of the Democratic candidates for the presidency recognize that there’s no way to convince White men that they will represent their interests. So they have no choice but to rely on their existing fractious and ideologically disparate coalition.
It’s hard to herd cats.
152
@Shiv
I am not going to counter your ‘Dems engaged in too much identity politics and ignored the WWC males’ argument. i think it is absolutely laughable after Obama and the Dems bailed out the auto industry, saved the economy, got a nice settlement from BP, and FINALLY gave anyone with a preexisting condition peace of mind while McConnell obstructed and served GOP donors’ interests.
Point is ... what exactly has Trump or the Republicans done for this group of aggrieved individuals? The trade war? Elimination of protections for preexisting conditions? Tax cuts for the corporations that are moving their jobs overseas?
331
@Shiv Wrong. No Democrat with any real political power ever demonized all white men in the way you are describing. They merely worked to ensure that people who *aren't* white men be treated with the same deference and respect and be given the same opportunity as white men. For some white men (and women), maybe enough to win the election for Trump, that was an unforgivable thing to ask for.
126
JMM,
Obama gets almost no credit for steering our ship of state away from the worst financial crisis since the great Depression. I think, in general, the view of government is the problem has been embedded deep in the minds of millions of voters. I personally do not ascribe to that viewpoint. Our government has it's flaws and too many people are angry, fearful and disappointed in their lives. We need a candidate to step up with a positive vision for America. Yes, many are angry, many are discouraged. We are poisoning the well we drink from. Too many are listening to charlatans like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones. Trump, like them, are feeding their anger. If these people see a positive vision that has emotional appeal and concrete steps that will benefit them, they will release their anger. Maybe it is the New Green deal, I don't know.
Blue wave 2020!
93
Am I the only cynic who thinks the race to the Democratic nomination is entirely beside the point?
Why don’t we just look at the numbers and we’ll know it’s beside the point. Does anybody believe we won’t see a rerun of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin? The difference between exit polls and the actual results in Pennsylvania was 5.6% — unheard of, never happened before in election history. Nearly 6,000,000 votes were cast. Trump “won” by 44,000. Less than 1%. Do you believe the exit polls were that far off? For the first time in history? Really? 5.6% off? North Carolina, 5.9% off. Wisconsin? 5.1% off. Ohio, 8.4%. (Ask John Kerry what he thinks of voting machines in Ohio, and what his experts told him.) All those numbers so far off in so many states that it never happened before and we’re supposed to believe that. That’s the American lie. The system works.
It doesn’t. We witnessed a silent coup d’état. We will see another one. Nobody, not one single American journalist with a substantial reputation, will say it. It’s too dangerous. Nobody wants to admit the entire thing is a fraud. That’s why we’re finished.
240
@ADN Such percentages gaps are not impossible if people feel embarrassed to reveal that they voted for Trump. And that seems quite reasonable to assume.
I'm no fan of voting machines–I know the current generation of machines at least aren't based on publicly verifiable technology, such as other cryptography-based technologies could afford us–but the above numbers look like a proof of embarrassment to me, much more than a proof of fraud.
29
@ADN, you are pedalling a conspiracy theory here. Maybe the numbers do look somewhat suspicious, but, so far, there still is no hard evidence. Why not concentrate on more solid examples like the vote suppression that is going on in in elections in many Southern states. This is documented and deserves more publicity.
47
@Charles Justice
The words conspiracy theory may apply. But it’s worth acknowledging the unusual number of those exit poll discrepancies. If it were three or four states the argument that people didn’t tell pollsters the truth would be believable. But in so many states? At those percentages? Would you say it begs the question? I have a problem with the words “conspiracy theory.” If I told you the United States government was selling arms to Iran to fund South American revolutionaries, it would sound laughable. Unfortunately it turned out to be the case. Bad things happen that we can’t prove. Mueller couldn’t “establish” a conspiracy involving the Trump campaign and Russia. But he wouldn’t dismiss it. Two years ago would you have believed that possible? I read the Mueller report. His conclusion is inescapable; he believed it was an active conspiracy not just acceptance of help. Look back at an army of suited Republicans storming the Florida vote count—“the Brooks Brothers riot.” How far is too far for Republicans? I commend to your attention Ornstein and Mann, who describe the Republican Party as a radical insurgency intent on one-party permanent rule. They don’t use the word fascism but imply it. They are, by the way, two political scientists working for the Republican-funded American Enterprise Institute. When ordinary academics think the Republican Party is determined to install fascism at any cost, it gives me pause. With Trump in charge, does it give you pause?
84
With science in all fields accelerating at such amazing speed, and the political world in such disarray, I think that
the time has come to replace as much of the electable government with younger, highly intelligent people who have a different world view from the presently comfortably ensconsed generation of "polticians". People like Eric Swalwell and Pete Buttigieg. I like Bernie Sanders, and think that eventually his ideas will happen, but he's frankly too old to carry it on. These things are accomplished incrementally - as has been proven.
11
Frank, whoever is nominated will have to run against Trump. That doesn't mean that Trump is picking the nominee; it just means that he is the opposition.
There are over 20 candidates out there and they could not be more different from one another. You think Trump is going to pick the winner? Whom would that be? You got any idea? Neither does Trump.
9
@Skillethead You can be sure that he will smear all the opposition with the most disgusting lies his advisors can dream up.
1
@Skillethead Ever heard of figurative language?
@Melbourne Town
I've not only heard of it, in contrast to you, I understand what it is. I haven't objected to any of Bruni's minimal use of figurative language. My objection is to his underlying argument. If you don't know what big words mean, you should try to avoid using them.
I have been thinking about Mr Bruni’s premise for awhile. Normally Dems would be unafraid to surge ahead with new ideas. There would be a lot more volatility in the run up to the primaries. But it’s Trump’s dangerous possibility of re-election that is moderating progressivism. We know that restoring the promise of the Obama years would be a splendid first step back to normalcy and my progressive primary choice may not suit this one goal. It happens to be Biden’s goal too.
4
What you have described then is not a group of adult politicians, who, having resorted to school ground behavior, should be acting as mature individuals with a focus and desire to work for the American people. Why should I then be interested in the Democrat slate if they are too immature to act as adults and instead act as aggrieved children denied dessert after not eating dinner.
3
@Mike
Well, you voted for the current guy even though he acted that way, didn't you, Mike?
1
@Mike, because the alternative is far worse, and an existential threat to humanity. You don't worry about refinishing your hardwood floors if your house is burning down.
1
All right, Frank. Let's say for the sake of discussion that that's exactly on point. What does it tell us about the best course to follow for 2020?
To be candid, the economy is very strong, so far at least. Ordinarily, an incumbent with that sort of tailwind would be ten points ahead easily. Meanwhile, Trump is running even or a bit behind. Why? Well, without boring everyone with all the ugly details, let's just sum it up as bizarre personal behavior. That's his Achilles heel, and it's pretty obvious.
That being the case, what's the best move? Is it to give the voters a different flavor of bizarre (looking at you, Bernie)? Or is it to give them something a bit more calm and quiet?
8
@Bob Acker What was learned in 2016 is that there is such a negative social aspect to saying you are favoring Trump that people don't tell others - and then vote as they planned all along. When pollsters are viewed as media, and the media appears to be biased against your way - there is even less interest in truth-telling. So polls involving Trump just can't be trusted.
1
@Bob Acker to give us someone SANE.
1
@Paul
Sure, the Bradley effect as applied to Trump. That may well be so to an extent. But as I say, he should be sailing. He's nowhere close to sailing, polls or no polls.
The tone of this article is critical of how Trump is shaping up his Democratic opponents. But why should this be a problem? I see some merit in Frank's argument that Trump's low approval rating has attracted so many Democrats as candidates. But in the open election in 2016, Republicans also had a much bigger primary field than in the past. Perhaps the lure of post-candidacy financial gains in the form of book deals, appointed positions, and TV gigs are more to blame for a large number of primary candidates than Trump's low approval ratings.
Trump has the advantage of being an incumbent, apart from having a megaphone in the form of Fox News. Democratic opponents need all they can to fight him. Customizing their campaign to Trump's strengths and weaknesses should be natural.
Elections are not fought in a vacuum; they are shaped by the time we live in and who the opponent is.
9
Methinks Mr. Bruni doth protest too much. First, it doesn't matter which candidate is nominated, since virtually all of them could beat him in 2020. Even setting aside his probable criminal acts, the abortion issue, and many of his policies, the demographics are simply lining up against him rather quickly: he certainly cannot win by the path he used in 2016. More importantly, his base is eroding - slowly, to be sure, but definitely eroding. Frankly (no pun intended), I don't see how he can win at all except by engaging in chicanery (e.g., voter suppression) and/or skullduggery (e.g., foreign interference - which he is courting because he KNOWS he cannot win without it).
However, more to the point, Mr. Bruni is simply wrong, in as much as he seems to be ignoring the fact that virtually all of the Dem candidates are running primarily (no pun intended) on issues and policies - NOT specifically on a repudiation of the president and his moral and ethical failings. Yes, they all "speak" to it, and most of them are in favor of impeachment hearings. But Mr. Bruni does a serious disservice to the Dem candidates, who have been careful to balance - indeed, overbalance - repudiation with actual policy ideas.
So no, the president will not choose the nominee. Their own policies, energy, and "personalities" (and, yes, their greater moral and ethical underpinnings) will determine who the nominee will be.
20
@Maani Rantel The more telegenic is the most likely to win.
@zula To some degree, that is true. But I think Dems are also looking for "substance" in a way they have not focused on quite as intently before...
1
It is very early in the race. Because of Trump, the country faces difficult problems that will require that the next president have intelligence, determination, and, yes, charisma to solve. The Democratic Party has a stellar slate of candidates that agree on the problems but have different solutions. We will hear their ideas over the next months and decide which is best suited to repair the damage done by Republicans. In all likelihood, the choices will be winnowed down to a realistic list after Iowa. That strikes me as a good thing. Why do pundits insist that the choices should be limited? We Democrats are very happy to have such amazing choices. We are, after all, a big tent party with lots of different constituencies. This gives us an opportunity to pick the candidate that best serves our interests and can beat Trump.
10
I fully concur with Frank that in 2020, the democratic candidates will strive to rebrand our country by trying to rescind all the disastrous legislative enactments of the Trump administration. However, let me posit by mentioning that Trump was democratically (let’s ignore the alleged collusion or the arguable anachronism of the electoral college for the time being) elected by us. Therefore, isn’t it reasonable to conclude that in 2016, our national zeitgeist was consistent with the leitmotif of Trump’s divisive message. Makes sense?
As a country, we need to be accountable for electing this uber exhibitionistic “Poster Child” of solipsistic narcissism who is desperately trying to dissolve our democracy into a dysfunctional dystopia through his divisive, despicable and despotic demagoguery. However, we can’t just dismiss Trump’s ascension as the dark side of democracy, we need to reflect in terms of why we elected and why we shouldn’t re-elect him. Unfortunately, the answer is not that easy because primal tribalism still exists in our country as evidenced by the following examples.
The followers of identitarianism chanted “Jews will not replace us” during the Charlottesville event. The recent anti abortion legislative actions by the GOP constitute a direct affront to women’s rights.
Unfortunately, as long as the above types of divisiveness remain amongst us - it will be a Herculean task to defeat Trump notwithstanding the effectiveness of the democratic field.
5
@Raj Sinha
My own take on "why" Americans elected Trump is that
"we" are unwilling to examine our gluttonous role in the creation of Climate Change and "we" prefer denial and fake news to facing the profound changes that need to take place in our values and our "way of life". Trump is the ultimate buffoon and reality denier who allows us to do nothing and continue our delusions.
1
@Raj Sinha and Hearthkeeper, WE did not elect Trump by a margin of over 2.7 votes in favor of Sec'y Clinton. Gerrymandering, "Citizens United" money, lies, fake patriotism and foreign interference elected him. Those are what we must overcome as well as all of the trumpist attitudes, jingoism, lies, spin and fakery. It's a big job, and from here at this early point, I'd guess perhaps only 25% of the current field is up to it. I hope the first "debate" identifies who belongs in that quarter.
It would be enlightening to have a thoughtful, cogent discussion about the Democratic candidates without mentioning the word "Trump." I'd like to hear their ideas, their policies, how they would be the best choice, without mentioning the T-word by name.
Trump has dominated any and all discussions since 2015. I would love to have a day, just one day, where my SO doesn't mention Trump. Alas.
Let the strongest and best candidate emerge. Whoever she is, she will wipe the floor with Donald. (Getting him out will be the next problem, but a much better problem than letting him stay.)
10
I am somewhat dismayed by the number of democratic candidates in the field. Let's get down to the business of defeating Trump and undoing the damage he has done.
Let's focus on a shortlist of democratic contenders and move forward. We have 16 months left before the 2020 election and there is no time to waste.
4
I wish some of the hopefulls would realize that the Senate needs to be re-claimed and can be re-claimed. There will be a number of Senate seats up for re-election in 2020. Hello Beto, theres another Senate seat opening up in 2020, you came so close last year. So much can be accomplished when both the House and Senate are controlled by one party and they cooperate to achieve great things. I still hope to hear from Sally Yates (what a great AG she would be!)
24