 |
| Clinton/Kaine wasn't the winning ticket in 2016-can Democrats find the right team for 2020? |
One of the things that has been central to this year's primaries has been a conversation about diversity. Unless Cory Booker, Andrew Yang, or Julian Castro are able to get onto the stage in December, it's entirely possible that all six of the Democratic politicians will be white (something you know the debate moderator is going to ask about). The question becomes-how much does the Democratic ticket value diversity, and in what ways?
If you look at past Democratic tickets (considering the makeup of their House & Senate caucuses, it does not feel fair to say that the GOP values diversity in the same way), only two have featured a woman (Geraldine Ferraro in 1984 and Hillary Clinton in 2016) and Barack Obama is the only black man to have been on a major party presidential ticket. Typically when we talk about diversity, it's ideological (something like 2004, where John Kerry was further to the left of John Edwards), geographic (1976's ticket between southerner Jimmy Carter and northerner Walter Mondale), or in terms of DC experience (perhaps most notable here was the matching of younger Michael Dukakis with Washington veteran Lloyd Bentsen). While it's probable that any aspect of the ticket that screams "historic" will be echoed, and there's the potential for quite a bit of history on these tickets (Bernie Sanders would be the first Jewish man nominated to head a major ticket, Pete Butttigieg, the first openly gay man to do so), I'm going to consider diversity of geography, experience, ideology, gender, and race to be the five distinguishing factors for the sake of this article, since they seem to be the aspects the tickets will be weighing "will we need to counter our presidential nominee with?"
Of course, it's possible that the eventual presidential ticket isn't particularly diverse, and that might not be a hindrance. In 1992, young Southerner Bill Clinton decided instead of trying to counterbalance with someone older and with more foreign policy experience (such as Rep. Lee Hamilton or Sen. Jay Rockefeller), Clinton went with another young Southerner in Al Gore (who brought with him more liberal policies on the environment and he was a veteran in Vietnam, both counters to Bill Clinton...he was also a devoted family man, which would be a clear but unspoken counter to Clinton, though one that might ultimately have led to Gore picking the wrong running-mate in 2000). In 2008, Barack Obama had Gov. Kathleen Sebelius as one of his final choices before he ultimately picked Joe Biden, which would have brought gender parity to the ticket, but wouldn't have lent itself to bringing much more experience to the ticket. As a result, I'm going to (objectively) rate each of these four candidates on how they are perceived by the public in these categories of diversity, which prominent/plausible candidates could counter all five aspects for balance on the ticket, and which aspects the ticket is least likely to care about in a fashion similar to (ultimately winning) tickets like Clinton/Gore and Obama/Biden.
 |
| Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) and VP Joe Biden (D-DE) |
Gender: Male
Experience: Significant (Longtime Senator & Vice President, Biden would arguably be the most experienced person to ever hold the White House since at least George HW Bush, possibly Richard Nixon)
Ideology: Moderate (by Democratic Party standards-there are very few, if any, proper moderates left in either party that would have qualified as moderates 25 years ago)
Geography: Mid-Atlantic/Great Lakes (Biden has heavy connections to both the swing state of Pennsylvania and blue state Delaware)
Race: White
Where He Might Skip: I could see Biden skipping two of these. His support amongst African-Americans is pretty significant (with Kamala Harris out of the race, there's little chance of that dissipating among the remaining frontrunners). As a result, I could see a scenario where Biden wouldn't need to pick a person of color as his running-mate, though that's a risky game (Hillary Clinton's support among black voters was high in the primaries, but she saw a significant decline in black voters in the general, possibly enough to have at least flipped Michigan, if not also Wisconsin and Florida). I think geography is Biden's biggest skip-coming armed with Pennsylvania, he doesn't really need to counter that-he can pick someone from a liberal area of the country without his ticket being called a "coastal elite" ticket, while if he picked someone from another swing state or red state, it's doubtful that areas like the West Coast or New England would punish him.
Where He Won't Skip: Biden won't pick a man. Four years after female Democrats in this country nearly saw the first female president, he'll realize quickly that he'll need to win over scores of women voters who disproportionately want Trump out of office, and they don't want to do so by having two men take him on, so a female running-mate is a requirement. He'll also need someone to be significantly younger than him (surely under 65), someone whom Gen X/Millennial Democrats can embrace.
Who is in the Running to Be His VP: Biden has name-checked a few of these women publicly. Sen. Kamala Harris is arguably the best fit for this bill (she counters Biden on all counts), and wouldn't give up a Senate seat (I'm docking points for any person who would cost us a Senate or Governors seat). Other people who should be on his list include Sen. Tammy Duckworth (IL), Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (NM), and Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (NV), who would all counter Biden in all five aspects we're looking at here, and bring experience. House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams will surely be on Biden's shortlist, but I think that's a risky game-Abrams comes with a lot of liberal support, but Republicans could easily brand her as a loser since her last race ended in defeat, and she has no experience holding high office. If Biden does pick a white woman as his running-mate, I'd assume he'd be doing so by targeting a swing/marginal state in hopes of gaining ground there, so that list would be Sen. Tammy Baldwin (WI), Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (MI), Sen. Maggie Hassan, or Sen. Amy Klobuchar (MN)...the latter arguably his best bet if he went this route.
 |
| Sec. Julian Castro (D-TX) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-TX) |
Gender: Female
Experience: Significant on Domestic Issues, Softer on Foreign Policy
Ideology: Liberal
Geography: New England
Race: White
Where She Might Skip: Warren's arguably in the toughest spot when it comes to her ticket, as I think she needs to counter most of these columns. It's possible that ideology won't matter-it's not like her picking a moderate is going to suddenly help her on the ticket, as moderate voters aren't going to gravitate toward her suddenly because she went with Steve Bullock (if she wins, she'll have won because enough people were willing to go with a very liberal presidential candidate...or just didn't want Trump to win). The one I think she'll be fine with is experience-she's a second term senator who is perceived by pretty much everyone to be extremely smart-her relative lack of foreign policy experience isn't going to cost her much as she's better at the subject than Trump, and that's likely all that will matter.
Where She Won't Skip: The other three columns. Massachusetts Democrats have a long history of being nominated for president, and they always counter hard geographically to not have a New England liberal ticket; the three recent Bay Staters are John F. Kennedy, Michael Dukakis, & John Kerry, and they went with Texas, Texas, and North Carolina (respectively) to balance their tickets. Warren will likely skip not only New England but also the West Coast, picking a running-mate from a purple or red region to counter her. She'll likely need to pick a person-of-color as her support among communities of color isn't as strong as Biden or Sanders. And she's not going to pick a woman. No all-female ticket has ever even won a governor's race-there's no way that the country, which showed that a female candidate is going to have to outrun her male opponent significantly in 2016, is going to go for an all-female ticket.
Who is in the Running to Be His VP: The most likely Warren running-mate is Julian Castro. Castro is from the South (Texas), and is one of the rare men-of-color not from a liberal region of the country who would be a plausible VP for Warren. He's more moderate than her, but not by a lot, and wouldn't get too many clucks about not being ready for the national stage since he's been running for president. Other than that, Warren's list is thin. Cory Booker is from New Jersey, so the geographic balance is not there, Deval Patrick is from Warren's home state, and picking a big city mayor is going to be a terrible look for Warren as they are almost always more liberal than the rest of the state. Theoretically someone like a Rep. Cedric Richmond (LA) would be a potential running-mate for Warren, but he's really moderate compared to her, and would have to put up with a lot of questions as to their policy disagreements if he ran.
 |
| Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) and Mayor Pete Buttigieg (D-IN) |
Gender: Male
Experience: Minimal (on either foreign or domestic policy)
Ideology: Moderate
Geography: Great Lakes
Race: White
Where He Might Skip: About the only place where Buttigieg will be able to get away with skipping will be on geography. Indiana is a red state, and while it always helps to pick a swing state politician (in hopes of gaining a point or two that might make the difference), this is a Middle America enough spot that he can pick someone from pretty much any region without issue.
Where He Won't Skip: Everywhere else. His relative lack of experience will require not only someone with more real-world experience, but likely someone who has held federal office. His winning will upset the party base, which would mean that he'll have to find someone to his left to run with, and obviously he's going to need a female running-mate for the same reasons Biden did. Buttigieg more than anyone on this list has shown weakness among communities of color, particularly African-Americans, so picking a woman of color as his running-mate is basically a requirement.
Who is in the Running to Be His VP: His VP list probably is just Kamala Harris. Buttigieg was effusive in his praise of her when she left the race for a reason-if he's the nominee, she'll get rite-of-first-refusal to be his VP. If Harris isn't an option, I honestly think here is where Buttigieg would be willing to just assume that experience is going to be a problem that he'll have to overcome regardless and pick someone like Stacey Abrams, as he'll need a black woman on his ticket. Buttigieg/Abrams would be a solid ticket to claim a "New Future for America" considering their combined age is 50 years younger than the Trump/Pence ticket, and Abrams would be able to calm the liberal base of the party down (despite the fact that Abrams is more moderate than most liberals would assume given how the left has embraced her, so she wouldn't struggle to match Buttigieg's politics). Harris or Abrams are basically Buttigieg's only options if he's the nominee and wants to win the White House, though.
 |
| Sens Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) |
Gender: Male
Experience: Significant on Domestic Policy, Light on Foreign Policy
Ideology: Liberal
Geography: New England
Race: White
Where He Might Skip: Sanders can skip ideology. The Vermont Senator is so liberal that there's no hiding this or trying to gain middle ground (Warren would have more success with this than Bernie), so as long as he doesn't pick a big city mayor (which would make the ticket an impossible sell to the Great Lakes region), I think there's nothing more he can do on that front. I also wonder if to some degree Sanders would be fine picking a white running-mate-he does surprisingly well with Latino voters, and would be anathema in states like North Carolina or Georgia no matter whom he picked (where moderate white Democrats who would go for a Biden won't go for a man who embraced the title of "Socialist") so this might not matter as much as it would with Warren or Buttigieg.
Where He Won't Skip: Geography, Gender, and Experience (and here, I really mean age more than policy experience). He's going to need a female running-mate for the same reasons I outlined above (until we're in a position where all-female tickets can be viable on a statewide level, I think the Democratic Party is now basically required to have gender parity on a national ticket). Sanders is old (older than Donald Trump) and will need a healthy, experienced running-mate for obvious reasons since questions about the health of a 79-year-old man who had a heart attack during the primaries are going to come up. And obviously he can't pick another person from the coasts, as geography is going to be crucial since "Vermont Liberal" will be an easy attack ad.
Who is in the Running to Be His VP: I honestly think Sanders is the toughest general election sell of these four, and as a result I'm going to say that the best chance he has is to double down on his support with Latino voters by trying to win Arizona (along with Michigan and Pennsylvania), and by picking politicians in those states or neighboring states in hopes of finding a connection to those communities (I think he'd have to give up on the South, including Florida though it'd be worth wondering how his position as the first Jewish presidential nominee might factor in Florida considering the state's high Jewish population). From the Southwest you have three high-profile women who could run: Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (NV), Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (NM), or Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (AZ). Sinema is from Arizona, and might be the smartest play, but she has a few deficits (she's famously candid, which could be a struggle on a national scale, her seat would flip red though with Sanders on the top-of-the-ticket the Senate is a lost cause to begin with, and she's considerably more moderate than Bernie, which might make her simply rule out a run with him). Sanders could also just throw a "Hail Mary" into the Great lakes by picking Tammy Baldwin or Gretchen Whitmer, but I think the Southwest is the better bet if he's the nominee.
No comments:
Post a Comment