As outgoing Rep. Beto O’Rourke flirts with a 2020 Democratic presidential bid, his already soaring stock among the media has been surging even higher, and he is even drawing comparisons to former President Barack Obama, who was a relatively inexperienced national politician before he captured the presidency in 2008. But such comparisons are unwarranted.
O’Rourke, D-Texas, who was the most profiled candidate of the 2018 election cycle, quickly drew media buzz about a 2020 presidential run after losing his Senate race to Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. A poll of the race from the liberal MoveOn showed O’Rourke narrowly edging out progressive icon Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., in a field with lots of possible candidates but no clear front-runner. It’s “Betomania,” declares ABC News. CNN, meanwhile, has already declared him the second-ranking Democratic presidential hopeful, behind only Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif.
On the surface, it’s easy to see why O’Rourke would draw comparisons to Obama. Like Obama in 2008, O’Rourke is adored by the media, popular among younger voters, and has the potential to unite various factions of the Democratic Party. But those are all really superficial comparisons.
[Related: Bernie Sanders: It’s premature to be talking about Beto O’Rourke’s 2020 prospects]
For all the talk about Obama’s inexperience, compared to O’Rourke, he enjoyed much more time in the national spotlight prior to running for president. Obama was the keynote speaker in the 2004 Democratic National Convention and gave what was widely seen as the best speech of the whole event.
Unlike O’Rourke, Obama won his Senate race. Sure, one could argue that Obama had an easier time in Illinois and that it was impressive for O’Rourke to come within 3 points in the deep-red state of Texas. But it’s also unclear how much of that was due to O’Rourke overperforming the standard Democrat or Cruz underperforming the standard Republican. After all, during his first term as Senator, Cruz managed to annoy or anger multiple constituencies. His conservative ideology immediately made him a top enemy of Democrats, while his brashness and courting of the Tea Party culminating with the effort to defund Obamacare angered the GOP establishment. If that wasn’t enough, his failure to endorse Trump at the 2016 Republican National Convention enraged many conservatives who had overwhelmingly supported the nominee by that time.
Obama winning the Senate race allowed him to tout some cursory involvement in ethics legislation. It also gave him the same platform as his main rivals, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in the primary and former Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in the general election.
He also spent his time in the Senate writing a book, The Audacity of Hope, which was a No. 1 bestseller, thanks to a boost from Oprah Winfrey, an early backer of his presidential run.
On the flip side, O’Rourke will be running as a former three-term congressman just coming off a losing Senate race and running against candidates who have more prominent platforms.
Also, Obama was running as the prospective first black president, enabling him to put together an ultimately unbeatable coalition in the primaries of white liberals, young voters, and black voters. O’Rourke, who is Irish, will be facing a lot more diverse field than Obama did in 2008.
Substantively, Obama also had a key issue that separated him from his more experienced rivals: the Iraq War. He called the Iraq War “dumb” in a 2002 speech, while Democrats such as Clinton and John Edwards were supporting former President George W. Bush’s ability to use force. By 2008, public opinion, especially within the Democratic Party, moved in his direction. That allowed him to argue that he had the “judgment to lead” that his rivals lacked and that he was the more genuine change agent for those desperate for a break from the Bush era.
The 2020 field is going to provide Democratic primary voters with a broad choice of candidates who have a track record of taking positions that are in concert with the Democratic electorate, so it’s hard to see a parallel issue on which O’Rourke would be able to draw a similar contrast.
So, I remain skeptical of O’Rourke, and I say this as somebody who back in 2007 warned conservatives to take Obama seriously when most were preparing for Clinton to coast to victory.
