Not So Fast Democrats
Musings
So, Joe is out and who is in?
As Joe was the president most people immediately said well, OK, who is vice president and moved to that person for the Democratic choice to be nominated for president. That is Kamala Harris. A majority of Democrats, but not all, seem to have lined up in her camp.
It is interesting that having thought about their presidential nomination as if they were almost brain dead, nominating an 81 year old person and intentionally structuring the primary season to give him a head start over any other candidates, which turned out to be a poor choice in terms of. ultimate popular appeal for the election, they are so cavalier. That now raises the question of how cautious and analytical are the Democrats with regard to their selection of a replacement for Joe Biden ? They seem to have jumped to Kamala Harris, the current vice president, almost as fast as Joe Biden sent out his letter withdrawing. I had trouble detecting an ounce of brain wave from the commentators and politicians that I saw on television. In terms of making that decision they just went down the list and picked the next person. I am not sure that is a good way to make this selection.
Contemplations
It seems when you are making a selection of who to nominate for president the first thing that you do is determine your goals. The Democrats number one goal in this election is to defeat Donald Trump and JD Vance. They will then want to also defeat as many Republicans as they can in down ballot races for House of Representatives, Senate, governors and state legislators. I have not seen a single Democratic politician or a single reporter and commentator go through that analysis. If those are your goals, who is the candidate who is most likely to allow you to achieve your goals?
There is not a lot of time for this process, but there is time to do it. It just has to be thought through and sufficient analysis has to be given to sort out the person or persons who might fit for the Democrats to achieve their goal(s).
My comments are not directed at Kamala Harris. I have not kept close track of her performance as vice president but then I don't think most of the voting public has either. Many Democrats believe she has done a good job as vice president and want to reward her with a chance to run for president. That is a nice thought and use of Democratic party thought. However, party thought is not necessarily a good idea here. Indeed, the Democrats have a history of not thinking too much about what they are doing, and lining up elections poorly. The issue is not how good of a Democrat. Kamala will be as president but can she win the election. In essence, beating Trump is the number one issue. That should dominate the question of who will be the Democratic nominee for president? I don't mean by rationalizing how Kamala fits that criteria. I mean by analyzing the criteria and asking amongst all the Democratic candidates, who best fits the criteria.
It is not that hard to make up a list of all of the major Democratic possibilities for president. They should then be scrutinized to see who is willing to seek such a job. Then they must be reviewed as to who is likely to succeed. Hopefully that gives you three to five candidates, or a different number, that might be considered at the convention next month. That is not a difficult number to process at a convention and it happened many times before. The nation is not in a position to root a for favorite persons anymore. The choice must be the most likely person to beat Trump.
I have previously suggested that I believe the election will be won or lost in the middle. That would be independent voters and disgruntled Republican voters that do not want to vote for Trump but were not willing to support the Biden administration. Therefore, the person who can pick up the Democratic votes and collect those votes in the middle is the individual who is most likely to win the election. I have suggested that the nominee should not be from one of the more liberal states as they will just be tabbed with the notion of "liberal" and not to be considered by any number of moderates and those with more conservative viewpoints. Also, I believe the nominee should be a female. Those may be appropriate, criteria, or they may be adjusted to fit other categorizations. Nevertheless, that is the process that needs to take place.
Thoughts
As I look at how the Democrats need to view this election, they need a younger, more vibrant person who does not have an excessive liberal tag on them. Some liberal leanings are just fine. But, for example, the governor of New York will just get badgered to no end on how liberal she is, whether that is a fair analysis or not. I believe Kamala Harris will just be badgered as a liberal because she was in the Biden administration, whether that is a fair analysis or not and therefore I believe the Democratic Party should look to their leading female candidates from the Midwest or the West for someone who fits the criteria. In particular, I believe a person who is a governor, who has run all of the state operations, to serve multiple groups of individuals, is going be in the best position as a chief administrator to present the leadership appeal needed.
It is hard to understand the process in which the Democrats are engaged. They are all just off and running saying Joe is out, let's declare Kamala in and let's keep going. I have not seen any analytical process to justify what seems to be occurring within the Democratic Party. The convention is coming up. I would hope that they get a strong analytical process underway soon.
Obadiah Plainman
Copies of all of the versions of this blog which have previously been posted are available at: thoughtscm.com