Bern Notice
And like it or not, the front-runner for the Democratic 2020 nomination as it stands right now, today, in the year of our Lord 2019, is Bernie Sanders.
I know, I know, polls show Joe Biden leading. But he isn’t running if he is smart, and if he does he will be quickly buzzsawed down to a nub the way he has been the previous two times he ran. And that was before he had women coming out of the woodwork to comment on his propensity to get handsy on video.
No, the leader right now is Sanders, and the quarterly fundraising haul shows it isn’t just the poll numbers he is leading in.
Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont raised $18.2 million over the first six weeks of his presidential bid, his campaign announced Tuesday, a display of financial strength that cements his status as one of the top fund-raisers in the sprawling Democratic field.
Mr. Sanders received almost 900,000 contributions from 525,000 individual donors, his campaign manager, Faiz Shakir, said. The average donation was $20, compared with $27 in Mr. Sanders’s 2016 presidential campaign, he said.
Mr. Shakir said that a majority of Mr. Sanders’s donors were under the age of 39, and that 20 percent of all donors had not contributed to Mr. Sanders’s previous campaigns. He said that 88 percent of the total money raised came from donors giving $200 or less.
Add to that number the estimated $14M he carried over from the previous campaign and the Independent Senator is leading the Democratic field by a fair distance.
Senator Kamala Harris of California raised $12 million in the first quarter, her campaign said on Monday. Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Ind., said on Monday that he had raised more than $7 million. Both candidates entered the race in January, several weeks before Mr. Sanders announced his candidacy.
Andrew Yang, a New York businessman who is running on a platform that the United States should provide a universal basic income, said Tuesday that he had raised more than $1.7 million from over 80,000 donors — noteworthy figures for a political newcomer. His average donation was $17.92, he said, an amount even smaller than Mr. Sanders’s.
Former Representative Beto O’Rourke of Texas, who entered the race in March and has been a prolific online fund-raiser, has yet to announce his haul for the quarter.
Senator Harris is benefiting from the quasi-official Democratic donor “bundlers” list, and has slowly but steadily been fundraising well, even if her poll numbers have not changed much. Conversely, her senate colleague Elizabeth Warren is fighting off whispers of disappointing fundraising, which weren’t helped with the announcement that her fundraising director is quitting. Her own quarterly numbers are being withheld with a note many took to be a tamping down of expectations. The fundraising for the rest is important because of the new DNC rules that a candidate must have 1% polling and 65,000 people in at least 20 different states donating to make the cut for the stage. Pete Buttigieg’s impressive $7M quarter has him the long-shot flavor of the moment and has increased his media attention.
But short some other dynamic changing the race, and it probably will, the field is pretty static. Minus Biden, it would stand to reason Kamala Harris would be in the best position to get the establishment party power players support, though the more progressive voices have already been sniping at the Senator from her left. Maybe Beto standing on things endears him to the party apparatus and he gets the mantle. The shuffling of the other dozen plus candidates will make for plenty of content, and speculation as to who has funding to make it to the June/July debates, but the fundamental question of this primary is still pretty simple: Can the Democratic Party as currently constituted stop Bernie Sanders from getting the nomination? And once you answer that question, the follow-up is at what cost to the Democratic Party?
While it was interesting to watch who fell on which side of the latest debate over Joe Biden, if you listened closely and paid attention the defense told you much more about the race than about the former VP. If you made a drinking game of plugged in Democrats using the term “not disqualifying” you would have been in the hospital by supper time. Mika Brzezinski on Morning Joe, didn’t bother with the terminology of the day:
“You’re eating your young. You’re eating those who can beat Trump. You’re killing the very people who have been pushing women ahead, who have been fighting for equal pay, who have been doing everything they can to respect women in their lives,” she said.
You could spend plenty of time dissecting everything that is assumed in order to make such a statement, but the hint is clear: beating Trump is paramount, and a certain segment of the Democratic Party would rather ride with ‘electability’ and known quantity Joe Biden than deal with round two of the Sanders supporters. Make no mistake, the wounds of 2016 are still there, and anyone who thinks Bernie campaigning for Hillary Clinton was going to close the wound hasn’t been paying attention to folks, HRC among them, who openly blame Sanders as a factor in that defeat. The Sanders folks learned their lesson well; they have been on offense, picking a fight with Beto O’Rourke the second his failed senate race was over, and are now denying they are behind the resurfacing stories of Joe Biden being too touchy feely with women. Regardless, Bernie Sanders and his supporters feel their time is now, they are owed for the DNC thumbing the scales against them in 2016, and they are playing for keeps.
Increasingly, it looks like minus the thumb on the 2020 scales, Sanders might get the job done this time. How he would do in a general election against President Trump is anyone’s guess. How his supporters will react to anything short of the nomination is established. Will the Democratic establishment risk schism to interfere if he does look to be winning? Can a Kamala Harris, or Beto, or Pete, or any of the others have a moment and rise to the occasion?
Static though it might be for the next few months, the 2020 Democratic nomination race will not lack for drama. It’s a shame one of the twenty-odd candidates isn’t named Hobson, since as it stands right now Bernie Sanders losing the nomination hurts the party (see 2016), and Bernie Sanders winning the nomination hurts the party (see panicky Biden propping upping). Hobson’s choice, indeed.
Umm… a cool glass of reality please to wash down this panicked analysis? Who was the Front Runner on the GOP side in 2016 when there was a large field of contenders? One Jeb Bush. Shouldn’t we actually see if crazy Uncle Bernie can do anything other than burble about political revolution when asked real questions in a debate? Maybe get some votes in?
There are plenty of ways Bernie could lose the nomination that won’t damage the party. He doesn’t have Hillary as a foil and he can’t yowl about establishment actors putting their thumbs on the scale because there is no single candidate for such nefarious mustache twirlers to unite behind. Most importantly, the 8 year Democratic purity itch that felled Gore and Hillary in turn is as dead as road kill and slumbering in its grave. It’ll take an eight year Democratic Presidency to revive that beast and that’ll be far too late for Berniacs.
I mean, hell, I agree Bernie would be a sub optimal candidate to run against Trump, but this seems overwrought.Report
Also, who was the front runner at this point in the cycle eight years ago? A fellow you may recall named Rudy! Giuliani.
It’s hard to understate the importance of this sort of thing at this phase of things. If Sanders’ movements were causing other candidates to withdraw from competition — a la Clinton in 2015 or W in 1999 — that would be different. But in fact we’re still waiting to see if Biden or maybe even someone else we haven’t quite thought of yet gets in.Report
Yes, exactly.
I guess the “The Democratic Party is just as deranged and fruit loops as the GOP so I don’t have to feel bad about myself for being a right winger” moment seems to be on an upswing right now. See https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/progressivism-making-democrats/586372/Report
Not panicked at all, rather dispassionate about the whole thing. It took Donald Trump till July of 2015 to break 20% and the wide field meant no coalescing managed to occur to beat him. Bernies already in the 20’s. He isnt going to go away, he will have to be beaten. Who on team blue is beating him?Report
I dare say Bernie will defeat himself but then I’ve never been deeply impressed by the Bern. As a protest vote against HRC in an otherwise empty field he seemed to do tolerably enough. In a crowded field with multiple candidates who appeal to different sectors of the left my intuition says he’ll bleed votes to every other candidate.Report
I remember the “cool glass of reality” people telling us how Sanders was totally meaningless, and then there he was at the convention
but, y’know, whatever, that was just the spasm of white male cishet privilege making itself felt, screaming and kicking and wailing like toddlers as they watched Hillary’s wave of the future cruise on toward its inevitable glorious victoryReport
Sure, as the runner up who lost the vote (even before super delegates weighed in) he deserved to be at the convention and he did dutifully campaign for HRC so I have no beef with Bernie. Just no particular admiration.
The second paragraph doesn’t seem to have any meaning in the context of the first though. I’m uncertain what you’re driving at. Did you copy paste a random word association from an intersectional crossword puzzle into your comment DD?Report
I believe that was sarcasm, and very well done.Report
What states would Bernie lose that Clinton didn’t.
Um… Nevada? Um… New Hampshire? Um… maybe Colorado, maybe?
What states would Bernie win that Clinton didn’t?
Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania… maybe West Virginia?
That gets Bernie to 262 and Trump to 276.
If Bernie keeps Colorado, he’s president. If he gets Ohio, he’s President. But that’s just me playing with 270 to win.Report
I personally think MI and WI and probably PA are back out of reach for the GOP now that Trump has been in office and delivered (or more accurately hasn’t delivered) and now that there isn’t a Democratic President in office. I still think the Bern would be a really risky bet for a nominee though.Report
Given that the suburbs around Philly and Pittsburgh are big swing factors for the state, and that a lot of those living in relatively high housing cost suburbs are finding out that Trump’s tax “cut” will cost them a couple to several thousand dollars, I very much doubt PA is in reach for him for 2020.Report
I think WV is lost to any Dem.
I think he would do better in some Rust Belt states (but I can’t back that up), worse in the West, and in Virginia.Report
West Virginia will be a blue state again within the next 10 yearsReport
Yeah, but do you think that places it in reach now?Report
Now as in 2020? Trump, barring something unforeseen will carry the state but Hillary was uniquely loathed in WV and was a big part of historic number Trump put up there. I went in depth on the what and how of that for Arc back in November if you really want to delve into it. Manchin is likely to leave the Senate and make a run for Governor again, so the who knows what will happen there. But to your point, the Dem bench is empty right now for statewide office, it will be a few cycles to change that, but the three largest voting groups for the foreseeable future in the state of WV are healthcare workers, government employees, and beneficiaries/pensioners. The social issues that scared the naturally conservative-moderate Dems, which is most of the state, away from the Democratic Party will evolve back and those issues rise to the forefront.Report
Interesting!Report
Bernie the anti-empire socialist probably puts Virginia back in the Republican camp, from a combo of people staying home and voting for Schultz or if there’s another McMuffin.Report
I think it is entirely possible that Bernie wins the nomination but the 2020 primaries are still a long time away and the polls at this point are buzz and named recognition. Biden hasn’t even announced he is running yet and might not based on the current stories.Report
Pete Buttigieg is also in the news for hauling in 7 million dollars. Honestly I hate this kind of reporting because it is lazy and easy and feels too much like the cult of savvy wanting to discuss winners and losers rather than do hardwork and discuss how policy X will effect the populace.
Pete Buttigieg might have a chance but right now I think people are into him for some very superficial reasons of he seems different. He has made some statements against coastal “elitists” that are likely to piss off primary voters in states that he would need to win.Report
I honestly hope that the Democrats will nominate someone that is not in their seventies, and doesn’t come from true blue coastal states. That’s all I’m asking forReport
They have plenty of alternatives. We shall see.Report
Who do we got? From Ballotpedia in alphabetical order by last name, we have:
————————
Cory Booker (D)
Pete Buttigieg (D)
Julian Castro (D)
John Delaney (D)
Tulsi Gabbard (D)
Kirsten Gillibrand (D)
Kamala Harris (D)
John Hickenlooper (D)
Jay Inslee (D)
Amy Klobuchar (D)
Wayne Messam (D)
Beto O’Rourke (D)
Bernie Sanders (I)
Donald Trump (R)
Elizabeth Warren (D)
Bill Weld (R)
Marianne Williamson (D)
Andrew Yang (D)
————————
Whew! One at a time.
Booker. 49 years young. Is New Jersey a coastal state? I mean, it is geographically. I’m wondering if it is spiritually.
Mayor Pete is 37??? How in the hell is he 37? Jesus, I’ve wasted my life.
Julian Castro is 44 and from Texas. Let me yell *DING* loudly.
John Delaney is 55 and from Maryland. Coastal state to the bone. But, let’s face it, it’s not New York or Massachusetts.
Tulsi! Also 37 (Jeez louise) and from Hawaii which, I understand, is nothing but coasts.
Gillibrand is 52 and from New York.
Harris is 54 and from California.
Hickenlooper is 67 and from Colorado. *DING*
Inslee is 68 and from Warshington State (Coastal?)
Klobuchar is 58 and from Minnesota. *DING*
Mayor Wayne is 44 and from Florida.
Beto is… sigh… 46. Texas. I’m not going to yell *DING*.
Bernie is 300 years old. Vermont isn’t really coastal, though.
Warren is 69 (nice) and from Massachusetts.
Williamson is 66 and from Texas and I had to google her first name because of Zion Williamson.
Handsome Andrew Yang is 44 and from New York, but he wants to get rid of the DST switch and give you $1000.
————————
That’s six people who meet your criteria if you count Beto and don’t count Williamson, or six if you count Williamson and don’t count Beto.
Seven if you count both of them.Report
If JFK and Stalin had a love child, which one of these candidates could stand in for that kid?
Around the age of 35-38ish also.Report
None of em? Ain’t a powerful mustache in the bunch.Report
Well hell, maybe one will show up.Report
“Booker. 49 years young. Is New Jersey a coastal state? I mean, it is geographically. I’m wondering if it is spiritually.”
Booker was for seven years the mayor of Newark, which, is for all purposes, a suburb of NYC (hint: NYC claims three airports, the second largest of which is New York-Newark airport).
Is New York City coastal: ya betchaReport
Delaney represented the West Virginia part of Maryland (but also, after a gerymander, enough of the suburbs of DC to make it possible for a Dem to win)Report
Biden needs to…er… embrace…the, well, handsy and make his campaign all about “hugging it out”.
Not saying he’ll win that way, but I am saying he’ll lose any other way.
On Bernie?… not sure at all. One thing I’ll note that I said way back in, what, 2015(?) is that Bernie the underdog was pretty careful not to burn Clinton or bridges. Bernie the front runner? Wonder if he’ll show the same restraint if/when things get heated.Report
He didn’t and he won’t. There’s a general scuttlebutt that a lot of the current candidate assassinations trace their roots back to Berns camp and his people have been going after Beto with chainsaws ever since the 2018 election wrapped up. Bernie went overboard when he started thinking he had a shot back in 2015 but he started out being careful and he went back onto the reservation once he lost the nomination so I don’t think anyone has cause to be angry at him over that. Campaigns can get heated.
Biden, hopefully, will realize it’s not gonna happen and will bow out. He doesn’t need to feed himself into this buzz-saw and that’s what it’ll be if the poor fellow jumps in.Report
Bernie has some strong advantages at this point. He’s a fundraising machine, has high name recognition combined with high approvals among Democrats, and he was the runner up last time.
But… in addition to the general distance of the actual primaries, there are two things that would worry me if I were a supporter.[1]
One is that his staffing decisions seem dubious. He seems to be picking people for ideological alignment, which is not necessarily the best way to go about it. Picking the wrong staff can be disastrous; it certainly didn’t do Hillary any favors in ’08.
The other is that he has a young, energetic, enthusiastic activist base, which is, well, not an unmixed blessing. Howard Dean had a similar base, and they went all around Iowa alienating Democrats into caucusing for other people.
[1] I am, at this point, pretty skeptical of him without being really negative.Report
Bernie benefited from the years when he was the only actual leftist within the Democratic universe, the guy who would pugnaciously defend the New Deal sort of liberalism that the DLC types were embarrassed to embrace.
But that time has come and gone. He isn’t even the most lefty of the leftys, the most pugnacious of the pugnacious, and he can’t articulate a message that isn’t better delivered by Warren.
I think of him as in the same boat as Biden, a beloved action movie star you really wish would gracefully exit the stage while the audience is clapping.Report
I think people focus too much on ideology as the source of his appeal.
It didn’t hurt, certainly, but he did fine with more moderate and conservative Democrats, a bit (but only a bit) counter-intuitively. A lot of his appeal was (and remains) rooted in the sense that he’s somehow authentic, in contrast to the calculating sellouts in the Democratic Party.
This was a particular vulnerability of Clinton’s, but it wasn’t limited to her.Report
So far I think Biden’s the best shot Democrats have in the general, so of course the usual suspects are trying to torpedo him.
Democrats blind spot is shown in the poll posted here just yesterday that said 50.3% of Americans thought the Mueller probe was a witch hunt. In that poll there was also a question about voting for a socialist.
*****
Thinking about the 2020 election, would you be satisfied with a presidential candidate who thinks the United States should be more socialist?
(N=1,000) n %
Yes——————————————————————220 22.00
No——————————————————————-667 66.70
Undecided ——————————————————–109 10.90
Refused————————————————————— 4 0.40
*****
Even if you can sway all of the undecideds on that one, it will hand Trump a 66.7% to 32.9% victory. That’s percentage would be bigger than a Johnson/Goldwater (EC 486 to 52), Nixon/McGovern (EC 520 to 17), or Reagan/Mondale (EC 525 to 13) landslide.
Trump will beat on a socialist like a drum, day in and day out, with mocking derision, just as he already does, whereas he would probably say pretty nice things about Biden, probably going with “Handsy Uncle Joe, ya gotta love him.”
Yesterday Real Clear Politics ran a story on Trump’s support from Hispanics, saying “McLaughlin & Associates revealed that Hispanic approval for Trump in March jumped to 50%.” In December, that support was only about 30%. The article goes into explaining the shift and some of the ways that many Hispanics are a bad fit for the Democrat party. Part of it is that most Hispanics don’t like Catch and Release (only 20% support it), they aren’t comfortable with abortion (60/40 opposed, in contrast to non-Hispanics at 60/40 in favor), and Hispanic Democrats are twice as likely to identify as conservatives compared to other Democrats. If the Hispanic poll numbers hold, a whole lot of safe Hillary states are going to be in play.
Holding the Democrat coalition together is actually pretty easy, merely requiring a level of moderation that amounts to “Don’t be crazy.” But Trump has gotten under their skin to such an extent, living rent-free in their heads, that the Full Crazy is being unleashed. This has already led to the problematic 2018 successes of some noteworthy political newcomers, who have seized the role as de facto party leaders. To the GOP, they are the gifts that keep on giving.
Most of the Democratic field is assuming that they need to run to the far left, but that may be a huge mistake because although the Bernie Bros were mostly willing to vote for Hillary, a whole lot of the center, including the Hillary supporters, might not be willing to vote for someone as far left as Bernie. The above polling data supports that possibility.Report
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2019/04/2020-presidential-fundraising-early-first-quarter-numbers/
There’a chart in the link above that compares the 1st Qtr 2019 totals with the 1st Qtr 2007 totals. Nobody is close to Clinton or Obama yet, though of course the 3rd -5th place people have a lot more money this time.
Echoing things said in the original post, and some of the previous comments, the question raised is – between Bernie and Harris, who is Hillary and who is Obama?
Edit to add – it’s worth also keeping in mind that Hillary Clinton raised more money not to be President than anyone else in history (by a not small margin)Report
Hillary had unique…let’s call them detractiona, while Obama hand unique attractions, so I’m not sure how much you can use either in this cycle though the temptation is there. In fact I think modeling off either would be a mistake. Bernie laid off HRC personally, for example, but his campaign and supporters have gone personal and negative early and often in this campaign already. None of these candidate will carry the “historic” sense Obama brought. The crowded field will accentuate those differences IMOReport
Sticking by my Bernie is 2008 Hillary take.Report
Listened to the Fivethirtyeight podcast today and they were saying that Beto’s voting record is actually pretty moderate but he has the image of a progressive. They speculated that if he could actually convince slightly conservative suburban white guys (like me) to give him a chance, the progressive acolytes may also vote for him because are a little more prone to voting for the image than the substance. Could be win-win.Report
Why do I always get the feeling that Beto is some weird viral marketing campaign for a new ice tea?Report
https://www.npr.org/2019/04/01/708856230/how-trumps-campaign-fundraising-compares-to-2020-democratic-contenders
Report
Howard Schultz of Starbucks is holding a town hall meeting in Kansas City, and Fox News is moderating it. He says he’ll make his final decision to run in the summer, but from what I see, he’s almost certainly running, and will campaign hard. He says his team has looked at the numbers for 18 months and they think he has a path to 270.Report
I just remembered the 20 minutes where we thought Zuckerberg was going to run for president.
Hee hee.Report