The importance of the Midwest in presidential elections has always been something to realize, and ever more so after Hillary Clinton lost Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa in 2016.
Many think had she chosen Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown, then she might have won those states, along with Pennsylvania, enough to swing the Electoral College.
So, therefore, much attention is being paid to two Midwestern Democratic Senators, both easily reelected in the Midterm Elections of 2018, as potential Democratic Presidential nominees.
One is the same Sherrod Brown, who never thought of himself as a future President, but is now seriously thinking about it. He is giving interviews where he makes clear that he is seriously considering a run for the White House, and is seen as someone that should not be ignored as a serious candidate if he runs.
Brown has been a member of the Senate for 12 years, and before that, of the House of Representatives for 14 years, after having served as Ohio Secretary of State for eight years, and in the Ohio legislature for eight years before that.
He is an unabashed liberal who has had appeal for the working class, something many Democrats have had trouble with, although Joe Biden has been of similar vein. Brown would be 68 in 2020, a full decade younger than Joe Biden, and Ohio has been a crucial state in presidential elections, with six Ohioans elected President between 1868 and 1923, and Ohio being a state every elected Republican President has won from Abraham Lincoln through Donald Trump.
Also reelected to a third term in the Senate is Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, a inheritor of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor tradition of Hubert Humphrey, Eugene McCarthy, Walter Mondale, and Paul Wellstone. Klobuchar was Hennepin County (Minneapolis) Attorney from 1998 to 2006,and gained a reputation as a tough prosecutor, before her election to the Senate. She has sponsored or cosponsored 98 pieces of legislation, more than any other Senator. She is seen as bipartisan, able to work “across the aisle”, and has a good public image, but not as controversial as Elizabeth Warren or Kirsten Gillibrand, other women thought to be likely to announce for President.
This author has particular feelings of support of Klobuchar for the Presidency, and think she has an excellent chance of being the Democratic nominee for President in 2020, and is more likely to gain support of white working class males, more than Warren, Gillibrand, or Kamala Harris of California. She would be 60 years of age at the time of the Presidential Election of 2020.
Both Brown and Klobuchar are solid possibilities for the Presidency, and are from the “heartland”, rather than the Atlantic and Pacific Coastlines.
So when assessing the upcoming Democratic Presidential race, do NOT dismiss Sherrod Brown nor Amy Klobuchar.
Ronald writes, â€œSo when assessing the upcoming Democratic Presidential race, do NOT dismiss Sherrod Brown nor Amy Klobuchar.â€
Iâ€™m dismissing them both.
D, I am shocked at this assertion!
Why is that so?
There are numerous reasons.
One reason which makes enough of a statement is that neither Amy Klobuchar or Sherrod Brown are for Medicare for All.
â€œCommon Dreamsâ€ reported this a year ago: https://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/09/11/here-are-39-senate-democrats-and-angus-king-still-not-backing-medicare-all .
At their websites, which are hopefully kept to up to date, is no indication that either of them have have since moved to being in favor of Medicare for All.
This is just one reason. It is critical. And for good reasonâ€¦
D, you make a good point here.
However, as we have learned over time, many political leaders “evolve”, and I believe both will endorse Medicare for All during their likely Presidential campaigns, particularly now, with Democrats having such a successful midterm election result.
It doesn’t have to be only Medicare For All. Medicaid expansion is another way to get affordable healthcare for people.
Pragmatic Progressive, thanks for the article share.
I believe it will take time to have a perfect system, but I do not think it should be a requirement at this point that all potential candidates demand Medicare For All, as it may cause nothing to change, and progress and patience are needed on any change in legislation.
The next president of the United States, affiliated with the Democratic Party, will be for Medicare for All.
If the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries voters vote the nomination to a candidate who is not specifically for Medicare for All â€¦ that will be re-election for Donald Trump.
D, for the first time, I vehemently disagree with you, as Trump and the Republicans will not offer Medicare for All, and whatever they say about health care, will NOT convince people to vote Republican.
That does not mean we should not move in that direction, but again, progress is slow in American democracy, regretfully, but reality!
The Democrats are not going to win back the presidency without a nominee specifically supporting Medicare for All.
A 2020 Democratic presidential nominee, not specifically supporting Medicare for All, will not unseat Republican incumbent U.S. president Donald Trump.
In the midterm elections of 2018, with the usual historical pattern of the White House opposition party winning the overall congressional gains, the Democrats were able to get away with that. That is because a midterm election will have around a 30-percentage dropoff, for example, with those voting for U.S. House by comparison to those who do so likewise in a presidential cycle. The 2020 Democrats cannot unseat Trump running on how badly he behaves and/or how dangerous he is without the Democrats having a bold and progressive agenda. Medicare for All is required.
If the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries voters vote the nomination to anyone who does not specifically support Medicare for All â€¦ they are saying they are okay with re-election for Donald Trump.
Well, D, I respectfully disagree, even though it is preferable to have Medicare For All, but after Trump and the Republicans refusing to give a damn about healthcare at all, it does not seem to me to be an absolute requirement.
However, we shall see what happens, and who is correct over the next two years!
Ms. Klobuchar summed it up perfectly. Health care reform is a beginning but it’s certainly not the end.
I agree, Princess Leia, as Obama wanted a lot more than he could get in 2009-2010, and that was a Democratic controlled Congress.
Change is too slow, but our system manages to slow things down, so promises can be made, but not necessarily accomplished in full.
The 2020 Democratic Presidential Nominee Will Tell a Story of Inclusion
I am someone who tends to shy away from making predictions because there are too many factors at play in politics to go out on a limb and pretend that we can tell people what is going to happen in the future. But I feel totally confident in predicting one thing: any Democratic candidate for the presidency in 2020 who buys into the framing of the race as described by David Von Drehle is going to lose spectacularly, as well they should.
The axiom that parties define themselves through the process of choosing a candidate has never been more true. Democratic identity is up for grabsâ€¦Is this the party of working stiffs or the party of Harvard and Apple? Is it a party of the left or a centrist party? Is it the party for women and minorities, or do white guys still hold some sway? Such questions will be the undercurrents of the raceâ€¦
That is a perfect example of the kind of divisive politics that I recently suggested should be left to the Republicans. Pitting working stiffs against Harvard and Apple represents the kind of attack on â€œelitismâ€ that is so in vogue these days. But itâ€™s really just nonsense. While fighting to ensure that the ladders to opportunity are available to everyone, Democrats can welcome the highly educated and the pioneers of the technology industry into their ranks with open arms.
When Von Drehle refers to an identity crisis related to being a left or centrist party, I have to wonder what heâ€™s talking about. As we saw during the 2018 midterm elections, the marquee Democratic candidates tended to run on very progressive platforms. But pretty much everything they championedâ€”raising the minimum wage, improving access to health care, common sense gun safety reforms, attacking climate change, comprehensive immigration reform, etc.â€”is supported overwhelmingly by American voters. The only disagreement on those issues among Democrats is about the pace of reform that is possible at any given point in time. That hardly qualifies as a center/left disagreement.
The real tell about where Von Drehle is coming from shows up when he frames the last question as one about whether women and minorities will dominate, or if white guys will still hold some sway. That is reminiscent of the old saying about, â€œwhen youâ€™re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.â€ Democrats who are standing up to ensure that everyone gets a seat at the table are not suggesting that white men lose theirs. If necessary, theyâ€™ll just build a bigger table.
As I contemplate these three either/or scenarios, I canâ€™t help but think of the campaigns run by Beto Oâ€™Rourke, Stacey Abrams, and Andrew Gillum. It is true that none of them were ultimately successful, but they made historic progress in states where Democrats have been failing for decades. I believe that one of the reasons they did so is that they rejected the divisions articulated by Von Drehle as old arguments that have done nothing but hurt Democrats.
Back in early 2016, Jon Favreau wrote something important.
Every election is a competition between two stories about America. And Trump already knows his by heart: He is a celebrity strongman who will single-handedly save the country from an establishment that is too weak, stupid, corrupt, and politically correct to let us blame the real source of our problemsâ€”Muslims and Mexicans and Black Lives Matter protesters; the media, business, and political elites from both parties. Trumpâ€™s eventual opponent will need to tell a story about America that offers a powerful rebuke to the demagogueâ€™s dark vision for the future.
What made the campaigns of Gillum, Abrams, and Oâ€™Rourke so compelling is that they offered â€œa powerful rebuke to the demagogueâ€™s dark vision for the future.â€ At a time when Donald Trump and Republicans have nothing but divisiveness to offer the country, the most compelling story Democrats can tell America is the hopeful one about inclusion. I predict that the person who best captures that narrative will be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2020.
Rump doesn’t give an F— about raising minimum wage, affordable healthcare, affordable college, fighting climate change, etc. All Rump cares about is brewing a culture war and enriching himself. If he gets elected again, it’s because too many people in this country are incredibly ignorant.
Nailed it Rustbelt!
In addition to healthcare and other kitchen table issues, polling showed that a good chunk of Americans want Congress to keep a check on Trump. That’s why I think that Trump’s chances of getting re-elected for a second term are not so good.
Yet another example of why Rump is dangerous and needs to be removed from office ASAP!
This is s— dictators do!
Another thing Rump did today was side with Saudi Arabia in the murder of the Washington Post journalist.
Chief Justice Roberts had to rebuke Rump today.