Cory Booker Bows Out

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has since lived and traveled around the world several times over. Though frequently writing about politics out of a sense of duty and love of country, most of the time he would prefer discussions on history, culture, occasionally nerding on aviation, and his amateur foodie tendencies. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter @four4thefire and his writing website Yonder and Home. Andrew is the host of Heard Tell podcast.

Related Post Roulette

10 Responses

  1. Jaybird says:

    Warren/Booker is now on the table.Report

  2. Saul Degraw says:

    Booker and Harris suffered from the same problems:

    1. Neither could settle on a campaign strategy or issue and seem to go back and forth. Nor did they have Warren’s “I have a plan for it” persona.

    2. They could not peel off older black voters from Biden or younger black voters from Sanders.

    Booker had some extra baggage because of his work with Zucks on charter schools and to a lesser extent his support of Wall Street and Pharma. I’m more sympathetic about the second part because Wall Street and Pharma are major employers in New Jersey and provide lots of steady employment and opportunities for adjacent businesses and jobs.

    American politics seems to be mainly about jobs, jobs, jobs because we are too puritanical to consider a post-work future. A good paying job is best but any job is better than UNI (aka the dole) in the American psyche. I suspect that this is more so now because our politicians come from the workaholic classReport

  3. CJColucci says:

    Warren-Booker has a geographic balance problem. So too Sanders-Booker. Biden-Booker would be even worse. He might fit well with Klobuchar or Mayor Pete.Report

    • Kolohe in reply to CJColucci says:

      Geographic balance is overrated. Clinton-Gore doubled down on the same geography, and as for Obama-Biden, ‘Delaware’ is myth created by corporate lawyers and interstate highway builders.Report

      • PD Shaw in reply to Kolohe says:

        There is a difference btw/ doubling down on a region that a party wants to flip (and Clinton-Gore flipped 4 to 6 southern states) and doubling down on areas of party strength. And I’m not sure if the primaries show that Booker really gets out the African-American vote.Report

        • Aaron David in reply to PD Shaw says:

          The flip thing is absolutely correct. Also, an ebony-ivory ticket is different than a regional ticket. And so on. Due to the sample size, you cannot really tell what is good or bad, statistically. It is all gut feeling.Report

          • CJColucci in reply to Aaron David says:

            I am not insisting that geographic balance is necessary, only that it is usually treated that way by the people who make these decisions.Report

            • Aaron David in reply to CJColucci says:

              Gotcha. Of course the proponent of a given idea is always going to be the biggest cheerleader.

              Regionalism made sense when that was major factor in the country, such as post civil war. But as we have de facto expanded the franchise, other groupings are far more important. There are so few of these events that each one must be taken on its own merits, and belly feel is probably the best metric.Report

    • Michael Cain in reply to CJColucci says:

      A geographic problem, but not balance. The VP candidate for the Dems hasn’t counted for much since Johnson. The problem is the lack of enthusiasm in the rest of the country for Dem candidates from the NE urban corridor at the top of the ticket. In an election likely to be settled by GOTV and excitement in Arizona, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Florida, a candidate from the NE starts with a handicap.

      I’m not remarking on why that lack of enthusiasm exists, only that it’s a thing.Report

  4. George Turner says:

    The best quip I saw was a photo of Booker labeled “Departacus”. ^_^Report