If anyone believes that the Democratic nomination process will select the person most likely to defeat Trump in 2020, please contact me. I own this bridge in Brooklyn that I’d like to discuss with you.
We’re still 12 months away from the 2020 Democratic convention and 16 months away from the presidential election. So much will change in the meantime that it’s impossible to take seriously any poll that attempts to predict how the very crowded race for the Democratic nod will end. For reference, in the crowded race for the 2016 Republican nomination, the average order of candidates in national polls conducted 16 months before that general election was Bush, Rubio, Walker, Huckabee, Carson, Paul, Cruz, Christie, … and then Trump.
Unfortunately, while the upcoming year will successfully select some Democrat to face Trump in 2020, the process isn’t exactly optimal. Said another way: Drawing straws would produce an equally intelligent result.
First, here’s a greatly simplified summary of the process:
Delegates to the Democratic National Convention in July of 2020 will select the party’s nominee. Delegates will come in two flavors:
- Elected delegates. Each state will use their primary or caucus votes to allocate the state’s assigned delegates to the corresponding candidates.
- Superdelegates. Elected officeholders, party insiders, former Presidents, etc. will vote however they wish.
Since the influence of superdelegates in 2016 caused some heartburn, the first round of voting this time around will include only the elected delegates. Unfortunately, given the massive number of candidates, it is more than possible that no candidate will win an initial majority. In subsequent rounds of voting, not only will the superdelegates be able to vote but the elected delegates will then be free to vote for whomever they wish. Rounds of voting will continue until someone gets a majority. Yeah. Won’t that be fun? While a contested convention would make for great television, it could well produce a fatally wounded nominee.
Next, there’s the order of the Democratic primaries and caucuses:
Iowa and New Hampshire will receive a ridiculous amount of attention and will be granted a undeserved level of importance as the first-in-the-nation caucus and primary. Neither state is exactly a microcosm of America and, together, the two states account for less than 3% of the Democratic delegates and a whopping 10 Electoral votes. However, since both states are at least somewhat in-play in the general election, I’ll grudgingly accept the fact that someone has to go first. Nevada goes third for another 1% of the delegates. Woo. But, again, the state is marginally in-play in the general election. So fine.
However, the fourth state to weigh in is South Carolina. Seriously? Frankly, I don’t give a dead palmetto what South Carolina Democrats think. Am I being a bit harsh? Nope, not at all. I’m sure they’re nice people. However, given the Electoral College structure, Democratic voters in South Carolina DO NOT MATTER in the general election. No Democrat is going to win the state in 2020. If South Carolina Democrats want a say in Democratic politics, they should first focus on becoming a swing state.
After the first four states, we come to Super Tuesday on March 3, when a large number of states will hold their primaries. As with South Carolina, I don’t care at all what Democrats in Alabama, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Utah think. These are all safe Republican states but will jointly account for another 6% of the Democratic delegates. On the flip side, I also don’t much care what Democrats in California, Massachusetts, and Vermont think. Each are Safe Democratic states which account for about 14% of the Democratic delegates. Yeah, sure, the Democratic candidate will need money from these states so they should have a voice. However, none of these states are at risk in 2020. As I’ve noted before, there is zero difference between the Democrat getting 90% or 51% of the popular vote in California. In both cases, the candidate gets all 55 of California’s Electoral votes in the general election.
It gets worse.
By the time Democrats in the swing states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania get to weigh in with about 9% of the Democratic delegates, well over half of the delegates will have already been elected. The candidates that could do best in these states could well have been forced out of the race even before these states get to vote. Thus, while it’s doubtful that any Democrat could win the general election without the middle-America states, the Democratic nominating process goes out of its way to marginalize their input into the selection of the nominee. Smart move, huh?
For what it’s worth, I live in Texas. While my state is technically a “Lean R” state, there is no current Democratic candidate that can win Texas in the 2020 general election. It’s just not going to happen. Thus, my primary vote doesn’t really matter either.
Only about 18% of the Democratic delegates to the convention represent true toss-up states. Another 9% represent the states that lean Democratic but are by no means guaranteed. Thus, almost 3/4 of the elected delegates will come from states that either no Democrat can win or that any Democrat can win. Only 27% of the votes to elect the Democratic nominee will come from states that are actually important to winning the general election – and most of those votes get cast late in the nomination process.
Perhaps I’m reading the wrong news feeds, but I don’t see anyone in the DNC that’s concerned about this. Above all else, the Democratic nominee must be able to win the general election.
What’s the point otherwise?