Democrats rev up for 2020 race

The 2020 field will be teeming with disparate personalities, most of whom have about as much businesses aspiring to the highest office in the world as you do. Former fund-hedge managers. Former corporate lawyers. Former TV personalities. Billionaires. Lifelong bureaucrats. Red-diaper babies. Mayors. Governors. Senators. Lots and lots of senators.

All of them share a single binding credo: Why the hell not?

Of course, some of these contenders are nurturing unrealistic expectations. Once faced with the daunting task of accruing the necessary funding or support, many of them will come to their senses.

Still, the 2020 race is different for a number of reasons.

For one thing, the buzzing crowd of would-be contenders are probably being seduced by the rare opportunity to compete in a truly open race. Not since Bill Clinton’s first term in 1993 has the road to the Democratic Party nomination been more opaque. For political opportunists, there is probably a palpable sense that whoever emerges from this scrum also has a legitimate shot at taking down the incumbent — even if Trump’s America happens to be enjoying relative peace and economic prosperity.

For another, there’s no longer any template for who can hold the job. In 2004, Barack Obama knocked off a powerful, wealthy presumptive nominee, obliterating once and for all the idea that a local backbencher needs to put in more than two years of part-time work in the Senate to be the president. Trump, the cranky populist and wealthy media personality, then went ahead and destroyed virtually every other remaining notion we had about proper American elections.

Now, of course, there are still a number of traits a person needs to embody before becoming a presidential aspirant, including possessing a near-messianic air of self-importance, a lack of any useful real-world credentials, an ability to show empathy for plebeian concerns, and having religious certitude about their ideological positions.

Which brings me to the closest we have to a frontrunner, Joe Biden. It’s early, but numerous polls find the former vice president leading the pack in name recognition, and Vegas oddsmakers like his chances.

Once the sort of man who needed to steal an entire speech verbatim from a British politician to sound intelligent, Biden has gotten a lot better with words. Last year he told Vanity Fair: “I haven’t decided to run, but I’ve decided I’m not going to decide not to run.” Biden, who’s been a politician since 1969, is still pretending to be Cincinnatus.

His confident, yet muddled, prattling earned him the nickname “Uncle Joe,” invoking a familial, working class folksiness that might appeal to the kind of white, blue-collar middle-American voter whose economic anxiety we’re told helped bring Trump into office. On the other hand, his nickname also conjures up an image of an old-school establishment liberal who is increasingly at odds not only with the emerging progressivism of his party but the identity politics that propels it.

There’s good news, though. If you’re inclined to support a septuagenarian white guy, but you’re looking for more class struggle in your politics, Bernie Sanders is still offering his services. “If there’s somebody else who appears who can, for whatever reason, do a better job than me, I’ll work my ass off to elect him or her,” our comrade from Vermont recently noted. But “if it turns out that I am the best candidate to beat Donald Trump, then I will probably run.”

Why wouldn’t he be the best candidate? Bernie, who can make a persuasive case that he was robbed of the nomination in 2016, has an idealistic and energized constituency to build a candidacy on. What’s more, pitting a socialist against a nationalist might be the most honest race Americans can hope for in 2020.

That said, if you’re only socialist-curious, and you find Soviet-era slogans offputting, there are many ways to calibrate your vote accordingly. Can Oregonian Jeff Merkley, the only senator to endorse Sanders during 2016 Democratic Party primaries, entice you? Or, perhaps you prefer the rumpled union-shop boss aesthetic of Sen. Sherrod Brown, who recently told ABC that he has been “overwhelmed by the number of people from around the country that have said we should think about doing this.” Because if you’re gullible enough to believe there’s genuine public pressure for a Sherrod Brown candidacy, then you’re probably the target audience for his economic ideas.

To be fair, though, most of the Democratic Party has been moving toward Sanders’ positions. His Medicare-for-all bill, the kind of socialized medicine scheme that would have destroyed political careers only a decade ago, was endorsed by 16 Senate Democrats, including a number of potential presidential hopefuls.

One of them was Massachusetts’ dour Elizabeth Warren. Her bureaucratic disposition might scream “technocratic dystopia” to many of us, but her longtime hardnosed populist positioning on trade, big banks, and state corruption, is, in many ways, speaking to the same apprehensions that President Trump did in 2016.

There is also the no-nonsense progressivism of Californian Kamala Harris. Harris, perhaps more than other Senator vying for the presidency, has been able to raise her national profile over the past two years, using her prosecutorial chops to prove an effective political foil to the Trump administration at Senate committee and confirmation hearings.

Some of you may prefer the East Coast. Well, New York’s sharp-elbowed Kirsten Gillibrand, one-time upstate moderate-turned-hardened-resistance-fighter — who at one point ruled out running, but since has decided to “a long, hard thought of consideration” about 2020 — might do the trick. Gillibrand exhibited a degree of political courage becoming the first Democratic senator to publicly urge Al Franken, then still popular in his party, to resign after a number of women accused him of sexual harassment. Though getting out in front of the issue might have cost her some good will among the party faithful: Politico reports that, thanks to her role in ousting Franken, “More than a dozen prominent West Coast, New York and national donors and bundlers — many of them women — said they would never again donate to or fundraise for Gillibrand or would do so only if she ended up as the Democratic presidential nominee.”

Or maybe “Minnesota nice” is your thing. If so, The New York Times says that the “calm, reasoned and reliable,” Sen. Amy Klobuchar is toying with a run. You’d probably have a better time with clam than the mercurial emotionalism of Cory Booker.

There are others circling the nomination. Former vice presidential candidate Tim Kaine, who seems nice-ish. There’s California governor Jerry Brown, who never goes away. There is Eric Garcetti, who is … well, most people don’t know who he is.

Professional moderate and Colorado governor John Hickenlooper is eyeing a candidacy, as well. As is Bashar al Assad’s bestie, Hawaiian congresswomen Tulsi Gabbard. As is former Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick. Don’t forget Obama’s wingman, Eric Holder. Or Senator Mark Warner. Or former Baltimore mayor Martin O’Malley. Joaquin Castro’s brother Julian might run, too. According to some reports even John Kerry might be reporting for duty once more.

You have to wonder if porn star Stormy Daniels’ former lawyer and CNN star Michael Avenatti might still be eyeing the ring. At this point, he’d probably be running behind West Virginia teachers union champion Richard Ojeda, who’s has already filed the necessary paperwork.

The most intriguing potential entrant might be Beto O’Rourke. The former Texas congressman ticks off many of the boxes, but more importantly, many have alleged that he possesses “charisma” — which, as everyone knows, is an essential trait when running the world’s most powerful military.

Former Obama aide Dan Pfeiffer recently argued that O’Rourke has inspired more enthusiasm among Democrats in the short time he’s been in the limelight than his former boss did in the hope-filled year of 2004. While there are a few similarities between the Texas congressman and Obama — neither sponsored any noteworthy legislation, ran any institution or business, or took any particularly noteworthy stand — O’Rourke might have been the first politician in history to prove, once and for all, that money can’t buy elections.

You might wonder why people are excited about someone who managed to lose a Senate race despite hauling in record-setting in-kind contributions from the media as well as more cash than any three Senate candidates the country. It’s amazing what a good haircut and a little skateboarding in a Whataburger parking lot can do in the Idiocracy.

Trump’s success also made the idea that self-funding a media-driven effort can be successful. Why else would a billionaire investor like Mark Cuban or Howard Schultz, the CEO of Starbucks, or hedge fund manager-turned-activist Tom Steyer be talking about the presidency? The latter recently started staffing up and spending on ads in South Carolina. “As I’ve said repeatedly,” he explained. “I am willing to do whatever it takes to save our country.” Well, at least he’s got the insufferable narcissism covered.

The former mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg, whose been reportedly eyeing the presidency for years, changed his registration to Democrat, and proved his loyalty by chipping in $80 million to help his new friends take back the House. Considering the fact that most national voters were probably unaware that he was a Republican, it won’t matter much. Expedient party flipping has rarely made candidates more palatable.

Let’s not overlook Oprah Winfrey, who has waffled on the question of political office for years. Though the star has stated her aversion to campaigning, she’s also hinted that Trump’s success has given her a new perspective. “I thought, ‘Oh, gee, I don’t have the experience, I don’t know enough,’ ” she said on Bloomberg TV. “Now, I’m thinking, ‘Oh.’ ” What does “oh,” mean? Oprah, often dismissed by the political class, has more executive experience and, likely, a far superior understanding on how to engage average the American than most, if not all, of the politicians mentioned above.

That said, the mad rush toward the presidency reflects an inherent unseriousness in American politics. While 2020 won’t be the “the most important election in history,” despite the inevitable framing of the contest by media and partisans, there’s a pretty good chance it will be the silliest. The recent Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh gave us a small glimpse of how Democratic presidential hopefuls, most of whom have accomplished almost nothing while in Washington, feel like they need to ratchet up the hysterics regarding the Trump administration — in some ways, attempting to out-Trump Trump himself. This can’t bode well for the nation.

Then again, there is always Hillary. Serious. Rested. Waiting. Ready.

David Harsanyi is a senior editor at The Federalist.