Just a few thoughts today.
The Atlantic clearly wants Gretchen Whitmer to run without actually saying they want her to run. So, here’s a question: If she runs, does she take any of the steam out of RFK’s sails?
Also, although I don’t think she’s a hack like Kamala Harris or Gavin Newsom, it’s worrying that Democratic pundits keep latching on to her. Harken back to 2006-2007, and it was actually unclear for a time that Barack Obama wasn’t just a pretty face and a good orator; no one knew if he could actually hack it. To be honest, we all kind of lucked out on him, and he came off as such an effortlessly solid and drama-less president that I think we sometimes take that for granted.
I won’t accuse Whitmer of being all the hype that Obama wasn’t, but it’s foolish of the punditocracy to just assume that we can keep getting lucky like we did with him. This “RiSiNg DeMoCrAtIc StAr” crap needs to stop, because the entire bench for 2024(?)-2028 is getting woefully underexamined. We need the Petes and Gretchens and more to stop getting speculative horse-race puff pieces, and instead to actually start getting their policies and personalities examined.
For instance, we know that Pete has had a rough go of it lately, but what else is he doing? What mistakes does he think he’s made? What lessons has he learned? Does he have a theory of the party’s future?
All I know is, no one’s asking him those questions, and as smart and talented as your humble writer may be, Pete’s not giving ME an interview any time soon, so SOMEONE is going to have to start asking those questions instead.Speaking of RFK, JVL’s threat assessment on him this week got me thinking. RFK kind of does represent a good 20% chunk of the Democratic electorate that is increasingly… “out of sync”… with the rest of the party.
Meanwhile, the Never-Trump lane of the GOP is barely cracking 3-7%. And let’s remember that these are the people who have stuck with the GOP through nearly 8 years now of kowtowing to Trump, and still haven’t decamped to the Democrats yet.
I think this puts the Democratic Party’s “grand strategy” challenges in a new and pretty stark contrast. The party has more to lose to RFK’s GOP-plant campaign than the GOP does to Biden’s not-Trump banner. What does the party do from here?
Pivoting to the middle to retain Obama-Trump voters proved successful but costly to Biden. A lot of Democrats still feel betrayed. And yeah, it worked in 2020, but how many times can Biden really afford to go back to that same well? A lot of these voters are perpetually unhappy and uninformed people who will just vote thermostatically (IE back and forth against the incumbent) because our country’s crisis of stagnation means keeps neither party from ever truly fixing our problems.
On the other hand, pivoting to soft-handle RFK’s voters, as Matt Yglesias suggests today, is a tight rope to walk. Sure, what Matt outlines is theoretically feasible, but what happens when the PMC overreacts and backlashes against even the slightest outreach to antivaxxers? Biden managed to handle one internal backlash (progs and PMC objecting to his moderation on Defund The Police), but was he lucky or can he actually keep fending off these backlashes? It’s entirely possible that the liabilities just keep adding up, and eventually catch up to him in a divisive firestorm that leaves the party weakened.
And in our last corner, pursuing the Chris Christie/Never Trumper faction is theoretically the least risky of these endeavors, but the numbers just aren’t there behind it. That is to say, as we mentioned at the top, there are fewer of them to recruit from the GOP electorate than can be sacrificed to RFK from the Democratic electorate. Hey, maybe this analysis is wrong — maybe there are enough independents out there who aren’t registering in polls as GOP primary voters, and would heed Christie’s cattle call to defect to Biden’s camp. Maybe that’s enough to cancel out RFK. But that’s a pretty huge bet to make.
Perhaps one silver lining might be that in the long term, RFK’s voters are nutjob progressive enough that their entrance could spark a broader GOP civil war, one that would eclipse any internal Democratic one. But that’s not something to bank on.
Anyways, the point is, we just haven’t had to look at it this way up until now, because we’ve mostly been thinking of the nutjob antivaxxer progs as not truly insane nor disgruntled enough to leave the party. Now that they’re in play, though… the big picture is looking about as bad for Democrats as it has in a long time.
On that cheery note, Happy Friday folks! Have a nice weekend. And as always, feel free to share your thoughts.
Whitmer has fought for, and expanded, healthcare in Michigan, though she doesn't believe in single payer. She handled the pandemic as best she could by shutting things down. She has wanted to do infrastructure, from the get-go and has pushed for it. She paid down debt during her governorship while simultaneously, increasing tax breaks for seniors and small business property tax. Education and especially higher education are important to her. Bipartisan funding to lower the cost of college for state citizens has been signed into law.
According to Whitmer, she just wants things to get done, even if she doesn't get the credit for those things. She has overcome a lack of name recognition during more than one race by getting out and about. She seems to be a hard worker willing to make concessions when necessary but ready to come back to what she wants when things are more conducive.