If some Democrats are thinking what strategists say they are, it’s not fair or good.

Edward Kimmel / Flickr 20120322 296 Elizabeth Warren at IBEW...
Edward Kimmel / Flickr

You guyz and galz all know my mantra by now. once is an accident, twice is a habit. And I’ve herd the same thing twice in the last 5 days, and unlike McDonald’s, I am not “loving it.”

Two different Democratic strategists/activists, on two different networks, CNN and MSNBC, have both reported the same rumblings. Both say that while on the road, working in the states, specifically Midwest and rust belt states, are hearing, even from women, that while they love the diversity of the Democratic field this year, they are to say the least gun shy, and in some cases scares silly of running a woman for President in 2020, due to the way that Trump manhandled Clinton. They say that beating Trump is job one, and they’re worried that no female candidate can do it.

I really hope this isn’t true, because if it is, these Democrats should be ashamed of themselves. This is just wrong on so many fundamental levels. If the Democrats are truly the party of equality and diversity, then they dare not just “settle” for a candidate because he comes with the “option package.”

For starters, two of the top five candidates right now, numbers 2 and 3, or 2 and 4 depending on the poll you read, are highly qualified and popular women. If you give in to that fear, then you tell approximately 32% of the Democratic base that they may be right, and Warren or Harris might well be the best qualified candidate, but that we just “can’t take that risk,” beating Trump is too important for another possibly failed lab experiment in democracy. Forget about “talking points,” to make that even a “whispering point” would rob the Democrats of all of the grassroots enthusiasm they have generated for our diversity.

second, their math doesn’t work in the first place. The last reputable national polls were spot on, and Hillary Clinton smacked them right in the snoot. Clinton won the popular count nationally by almost three million votes, which assayed out to 2% points, almost exactly what the final polls showed when handicapping the race. Donald Trump won the electoral college, with the valued assistance of Vlad the Imp, by convincing 77,000 internet addled fools in three states to make the worst decision of their pathetic lives. This is not an acceptable reason to throw two of our strongest candidates to the wolves out of fear.

But the biggest reason that this is a terrible idea is because it is based on a possible “strategy” brought on by the current dynamics of the race itself, a strategy what may well be flawed from its inception.

Right now, Joe Biden is the front runner in just about every poll out there. So,obviously the strategy should be to play to Biden’s strength as a candidate, right? And what is Biden’s greatest alleged strength? Biden is the one who can hands down “win back” those 77,000 Trump voters who voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012, and flip those states back to the Democrats again, retaking the electoral college. Sounds good, right? But what if it’s not the right strategy?

Look, forget about those 77,000 twisted sisters for a moment, you might not even need them if you play your cards right. In 2018, the Democrats flipped 40 seats in retaking the House, and they didn’t do it by winning back any disaffected Obama-Biden voters. They did it by winning “soccer moms,” and other Republican and independent voters in the former GOP strongholds of suburbs and exurbs of major cities with enough of an IQ to flip the channel occasionally, and ran from Trump like a scalded cat. That’s the Democrats “secret sauce” for 2020, and the GOP knows it.

Presidential votes are counted at the statewide level, not district by district, or county by county. With a highly qualified and inspirational presidential candidate and running mate, ya think there are a combined 77,000 votes in the suburbs of Milwaukee, Detroit, and Philadelphia to more than offset those  piddly ass votes that Trump squeaked by with in 2016? Especially since the African American vote in the suburbs of Milwaukee that sat out 2016 was more than three times the number of the margin that Trump won Wisconsin by. And Pennsylvania will be voting with redrawn district maps by the PA Supreme Court, in response to the GOP’s flagrant gerrymandering in that state. And one more thing, all three of those states, PA, MI, and WI flipped blue in the Democratic tidal wave of 2018. Give the people what they want, and they’ll come out for the show. Every time.

And what about Florida? I believe Trump won Florida by a tight 100,000 votes or so statewide. You think a red hot Democratic candidate might be able to scrape up 100,000 votes in the suburbs of Miami, Tampa, and Orlando? I do. After all, long time GOP incumbent Ileana Ros-Lehtinen bailed out in 2018 rather than have to run with the stain of Trump on her soul. And Trump hardly cake walked home in either Arizona or North Carolina either, think Trump fatigue and a highly motivated Democratic base could collect the 200,000 or less needed votes to flip those too Why not, considering that in 2018 the Democrats more than doubled Clinton’s winning margin over Trump in 2016 nationally.

My whole point is that not only is this dread of nominating a woman candidate to go up against Trump unfounded,even by the numbers in 2016, it’s also antithetical to everything that the Democratic party purports to stand for. And in this particular case, that fear may well be baseless and unfounded. Because,it’s true, especially when dealing with the likes of Donald Juan Trump, there’s more than one way to skin a rat.

 

 

Thank you to all who already support our work since we could not exist without your generosity. If you have not already, please consider supporting us on Patreon to ensure we can continue bringing you the best of independent journalism.

Leave a Comment

Be the First to Comment!

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of