The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ
laddicus finch
Jr. Member
Posts: 1,845
|
 |
« on: November 21, 2022, 09:27:02 PM » |
|
Pres Mike explained the institutional reasons better than I could. But the other element is the weirdness of the Trump presidency, and Democrats' disagreements on how to handle it.
What's important to appreciate is that even though 2020 primaries are now remembered as a Biden vs Sanders race, Biden didn't really solidify himself as the "establishment" choice, really until South Carolina. The Democratic establishment and base were both traumatized by 2016 and there were different theories on how to win back the White House.
What would defeat Trump? Was the key to run someone with decades of experience, someone familiar to just about every American voter and generally acceptable to the broad spectrum of the Democratic coalition? Or was it to run someone new and fresh, without the baggage that comes with DC politics, and inject new energy into the party? Was it to appeal to heartland voters by taking it easy on identity politics? Or was it to double down and energize the parts of the American public that were the most strongly opposed to Trump, like minorities, women, and college-educated voters? Was it to double down on economic populism and make the election about universal healthcare and taking on big business? Or was it to demonstrate moderate positions on pocketbook issues that the American public often has a hard time trusting liberals on? Or was it to just say to hell with politics as usual, let's run our own NYC billionaire, dump cash into the airwaves, and win by drowning out Trump?
You can read into which candidate(s) I'm talking about with each of those rhetorical questions. Point is, it was not at all clear what would work best, so everyone thought they had a good case to make.
|
