As much as I enjoy being right, there are times that I would dearly love to be proven wrong. Unfortunately, many of my old blog posts appear to be sadly prophetic.
The Democratic nominating process is convincingly demonstrating that it wasn’t designed to pick a nominee that can actually win the general election. Iowa was a horrible way to start things off. Given the largely unchanged Electoral landscape, a moderate at the top of the ticket running a “Middle America” campaign remains the best Electoral strategy to unseat Trump. However, Democrats are allowing Iowa and New Hampshire – representing 1.6% of the Democratic convention delegates and not representing anything remotely similar to the in-play 2020 voter pool – to push the party into a doomed “Progressive Left” or “Young Turk” strategy with candidates that have Team Trump salivating.
<sigh>
Let’s review where things currently stand for 2020.
At this point, I’m spotting Trump 248 Electoral votes from 20 states.
The 248 votes covers all states that are solid Republican strongholds and all states that lean Republican. There is no candidate in the entire Democratic field that can flip any state that would naturally favor a Republican – even if his name is Donald Trump. The 248 also includes the technically swing states of Iowa and Florida. My write-off of Iowa reflects current polling data and the fact that Iowa Democrats have proven to be incompetent and prone to eating their own. My concession of Florida is largely based on recent Republican victories in the state, complete Republican control of the state, and the fact that Florida is an extremely expensive media market. Florida will likely be too steep a hill for any Democrat to climb in 2020.
That 248 Electoral vote total is only 22 votes short of a win. Sad, but true.
On the other side, Democrats have 182 Electoral votes in the bag regardless of the nominee. Frankly, with a “D” after my name, I could win every one of these 13 states in the general election. I wouldn’t win by huge margins, but I’d end up with the same 182 Electoral votes that someone with 99% of the popular vote would get.
There are another 51 Electoral votes in another 7 states that will probably vote for the Democratic nominee. These states include Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Minnesota, Virginia, New Hampshire, and Maine. While they could swing away, Hillary Clinton managed to carry every one of them in 2016 running an abysmal campaign. Trump’s folks have already begun targeting most of these states to try to pad their 2020 margin. However, many (but not all) of the current Democratic field should be able to carry these states with some reasonable effort.
The above gives Democrats a starting point of 233 Electoral votes – 37 votes short of a win.
All of this leaves four states – Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Arizona – with 57 combined Electoral votes that will decide the 2020 election. If Democrats can’t nominate someone that can carry at least three of these four states, they have no prayer of winning. It’s not quantum physics. Democrats need a candidate that can bring out Democratic-leaning voters in these states and/or can give Republicans-leaning voters in these states an excuse to stay home.
Trump won all four of these true swing states in 2016 and he has a decent shot to win all four again in 2020. If he does, he wins the election.
Each of the states has their own individual demographics, but there are some commonalities. In particular, the voting population of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania are generally centrist – neither ultra-liberal nor ultra-conservative – and all have significant working, middle-class, blue-collar populations. They are true “heartland” voters.
So, here’s my quick take at how the major candidates play in these heartland states. They combine for 46 Electoral votes – enough to give a Democrat the win (assuming he or she can also retain the states that Clinton won in 2016).
- Bernie Sanders: His socialist history just isn’t going to fly in the heartland. Democrats have largely avoided Sanders’ past. Trump won’t. Sanders would lose all three heartland states and he’d probably lose a few of the states that only lean Democratic. Sanders might be able to pull off a slight majority of the overall popular vote, but he’d be slaughtered in the Electoral College. He’d lose to Trump.
- Pete Buttigieg: It pains me to say this, but the reality is that the 2020 heartland voter simply won’t vote for a gay guy. They’ll say it’s because of his lack of experience; it’ll be because he’s gay. Buttigieg would lose all three heartland states. He might lose a few other states due to his lack of experience. In any case, he’d lose to Trump.
- Elizabeth Warren: She’ll scare a lot of heartland voters. Right or wrong, they’ll vote against her for many of the same reasons that they voted against Hillary Clinton. Warren could probably win Pennsylvania and Arizona. She’d likely squeak out wins in all of the lean-D states that Clinton won in 2016. However, she’d lose Wisconsin and Michigan and thus fall short of a win in the Electoral College. She could get closer to a win than Sanders or Buttigieg, but she’d probably still lose to Trump.
- Michael Bloomberg: The heartland voter thought Trump would make a good President because they thought he was a good businessman. They aren’t as convinced of that now. In any case, they weren’t bothered at all by Trump’s wealth; they won’t be bothered by Bloomberg’s. Bloomberg could be seen as just a better businessman than Trump and Bloomberg could buy carry all three heartland states. His money could help him retain most of the lean-D states and “might” even put Florida back in play. It’d be tight, but he could win against Trump.
- Amy Klobuchar: The heartland voter may well see her as one of their own. Klobuchar could carry all three heartland states and easily retain the lean-D states. She’d likely win against Trump.
- Joe Biden: While he’s been running an even worse campaign than Clinton ran in 2016, Biden understands the heartland voter. These folks don’t give a crap about the noise and they’ll be irritated when Trump goes after Biden’s family. Biden could carry all three heartland states and easily retain the lean-D states. He’d likely win against Trump.
That’s right. The candidates that are currently leading in the race for the Democratic nomination have the worst chance of beating Trump. The candidates in the back of the Democratic field have the best chance of beating Trump.
My latest suggestion? A Klobuchar / Warren ticket. Think about it. A combination of two very smart Senators representing different wings of the Democratic party. Who better than two women to show Democrats how to work together? What better contrast to the Trump/Pence ticket? Both candidates can hold their own in a debate, they’d guarantee the woman vote, and they wouldn’t have Biden’s (or Clinton’s) baggage. Klobuchar / Warren would carry all four of the swing states and would easily take all of the lean-D states. 290 Electoral votes is a win. And I absolutely love the idea of Trump getting beaten by TWO women.
The only problem is that Klobuchar / Warren has little chance of actually happening.
Dear Democratic Party: PLEASE prove me wrong this time.