In 2020, authenticity and empathy will, yes, trump ideology

[BeyondGeography]

What the Democrats’ Turn Leftward Means for the Party’s Chances in 2020

Last week, twenty Democratic candidates for President debated in the course of two nights in Miami. Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren appeared to bolster their campaigns, with Harris, in particular, making headlines for her criticism of Joe Biden’s past opposition to school busing. Later in the week, Harris explicitly announced that she supports a return of school busing to ease segregation in education. This followed all of the candidates at Thursday’s debate coming out in favor of government-funded health care for undocumented immigrants, Elizabeth Warren supporting the decriminalization of border crossings, and Harris initially seconding calls from Warren and Bernie Sanders for the abolition of private health insurance. (Harris claimed that she misunderstood the question; earlier this year, she appeared to take several different positions on the issue.) Joe Biden’s unsteady performance, meanwhile, weakened the candidacy of the Party’s highest-profile moderate.

With President Trump and his team delighted by the Democrats’ leftward turn, a central question emerges: Will running on a more explicitly progressive platform energize the Democratic base, or will it cost the Party the 2020 election? To consider this question and others, I spoke by phone with Dave Wasserman, the U.S. House editor for the Cook Political Report and a contributor to NBC News. During our conversation, which has been edited for length and clarity, we also discussed whether voters are less ideological than people think they are, the ways in which the Electoral College presents a challenge to Democrats winning Presidential elections, and the true lesson of the 2018 midterms.

Do you think Democrats whose primary desire is to see Trump defeated should be concerned or excited that their party seems to be moving leftward?

I don’t think Democrats would be wise to run against Trump on a platform of completely open borders and abolishing private health insurance. There are limits. But, generally, the tiny sliver of voters in this country who are still persuadable are not highly ideological people. They are fundamentally anti-élite in nature, and they are looking for three characteristics in a candidate for President that don’t have much to do with left-versus-right. And those characteristics are authenticity, being a credible agent for change, and empathy. In other words, does this person understand my daily struggles? And a common thread between Obama and Trump was a common touch.

It’s all relative, but, whether it was having been a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago or a billionaire who ate K.F.C. and went to professional wrestling matches, it struck a chord with those voters.

More at https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/what-the-democrats-turn-leftward-means-for-the-partys-chances-in-2020

[Demsrule86]

1. completely overlooks the type of voters found in the rust belt...must win states. We are going to

lose if we don't rebuild the blue wall... we have no path to the presidency. The idea that any of our candidates can win this area is not true. Most have gone way to far left. And open borders and MFA with private insurance illegal will hurt us badly.

[BeyondGeography]

3. The point is you can fine tune policies all you want

But if you nominate someone who doesn’t connect with people personally it won’t matter.

The flip side is if you have that ability, you can fine tune as needed and win swing voters.

[Demsrule86]

6. Biden connects with folks in the rust belt...he did it in 08 and 12...

[BeyondGeography]

9. He did

This line of reasoning is kinder to Biden than it is to Harris, IMO, who I find to be, let’s say, a little too personal results-oriented. It also fits Warren.

[Demsrule86]

28. If the choice was between Warren and Harris, I would choose Warren. She has tacked too far left

IMHO to win in the mid west, but has a better chance than Harris who has none that I can see.

[Turin_C3PO]

4. Our key to the Rust Belt

is increasing African American turnout in the cities. If we do that, we win.

[Demsrule86]

5. No we won't. I know that many feel it is time to run a progressive candidate but

you shouldn't this year not with Trump...what you overlook is many in the Black community are moderates and won't like the policies either.

[Turin_C3PO]

7. I don't think

AA’s will sit out because a candidate is progressive. They had lower turnout with Hillary Clinton and she’s fairly moderate to liberal. I think Biden is our best shot but if he continues to shoot himself in the foot and not tighten up his messaging, he’s going to lose the primary.

[Demsrule86]

8. Some will...and it may be enough to lose a close election. The rust belt is tricky and

you can expect voter suppression shenanigans too...we need to win back the Obama voters...it took them and AA community communities to win here.

[Turin_C3PO]

10. Yes I agree.

I’ve been saying all over threads that one of our main keys to victory is winning back those who voted Obama twice then turned around and voted for the Idiot.

[Demsrule86]

22. That is exactly it...and what people don't understand is tha Biden was very helpful in delivering

people in my area both in 08 and in 12...He did a great job. I worked the campaign and Biden is and was beloved in Ohio...He speaks their language. None of the other candidates do.

[Demsrule86]

27. You are absolutely right.

[BlueWI]

41. Black voters were a statistical key to the WI loss in 2016.

Between voter suppression and a lukewarm statewide campaign, Democratic voting was down 200K in Wisconsin in 2016. Trump got about the same number of votes as Romney in 2012 with big defections from Republican to Libertarian in the state, bigger than the number of Greens voting for Stein. So the enthusiasm for Trump in WI in 2016 is exaggerated. A big turnout from the Democratic base along with earned independent support wins the election in 2020.

Low turnout among base voters is toxic to Democratic campaigns in a presidential year.

Those are mistakes not to repeat.

[Honeycombe8]

12. They are moderate, aren't they? I think Michael Moore had a handle on what they cared about.

They are not ideological about many things. They are meat and potatoes, wallet issue voters. Jobs. The belief that the trade agreements are sucking jobs out of the country. Empathy, like the OP article says. "Is anyone listening to me? Does anyone care? Do I matter in America, any more?"

I don't personally know, though. I've never been to those states.

[Turin_C3PO]

14. I know you're not addressing me but I think the article is interesting

in that the man being interviewed says that the ability to connect is most important. Obama had it, Clinton had it, I guess Trump has a bad version of it.

Who in this field can connect? In my opinion, Biden, Warren, O’Rourke and Harris. I would say Buttigieg but he has virtually no African American support which is critical for a Democratic victory.

[Honeycombe8]

16. I think the OP and you (and me) are onto something here.

I'm not sure who has the most ability to connect. I'll have to look for that. Offhand, I'd say that's part of Biden's appeal. He pays attention to people, he listens, he seems to care.

I'll have to pay attention to Warren and Beto for that. I don't think Harris has that warm, fuzzy "I feel your pain." It's not part of her DNA. I could be wrong, but that's my impression. Now, I'm okay with that approach, as long as she lets people know she feels their pain, even if she doesn't show it emotionally, like Clinton did. Obama was one of the best on that, too, as you say.

[Demsrule86]

21. They are moderate...pocket book issues...and anyone here will tell you both parties show up at

elections and then that's it. So they were ripe for the picking with a liar like Trump...not me. I had gone to school in Connectiuct and new Trump was a POS...and I am a yellow dog Democrats. Now Trump has harmed this area and we have a chance even in Ohio if Biden is the candidate. The other candidates have moved too far to the left to to win here...and there is a dislike of coastal elites which fair or not Harris and Warren would be considered.

Also, while my neighbors are unhappy with the treatment of refugees...they are not for open borders and with many here unable to afford health care even with a medicaid expansion... thanks to Trump's attacks on the ACA, they would be infuriated if undocumented folks received 'free' health care...we all know it is not that siimple. But it is what it is. These are not bad people either...they have been kicked around for years...I have heard some even on this site say well...'those jobs aren't coming back;. Well jobs need to come back. It is a disgrace how the midwest has been treated with bad trade deals and neglected too...a few super rich folks( Romney and his buddies) were enriched but the folks lost good paying jobs. Now Trump can't fix this...he doesn't give two shits and after he attacked the union in Lordstown, a plant he caused to shut down with steel tariffs, people are starting to wake up...but they need a candidate that speaks their language...only Biden can do this... He helped Pres. Obama tremendously with this area both in 08 and 12.

[Honeycombe8]

31. I agree.

I was dismayed at the cheers when one of the candidates said he/she wanted to provide free health care to undocumented people in his/her state or district, or something like that. How can that be right, when we're not providing free health care to all Americans? And we would ask those Americans w/o health care to pay taxes so that non-Americans can get free health care? I think some of the candidates are getting carried away promising lots of free stuff. Nothing's free, anyway.

Trump doesn't give a lick about the workers in the rust belt, or anywhere else. He made false promises. But they grasped at whatever straw they could get. The Democratic Party can get them back. From a selfish standpoint, we need those states. Plus, we ARE the party that represents the working man and woman.

[Demsrule86]

38. Even Biden raised his hand...and how can you deny medical care to people? But it will play very

badly here.

[Honeycombe8]

40. You go ahead and pay for the health care for non-Americans.

Just don't pledge other people's money for it.

If you provide free health care to illegal immigrants, people from around the world will enter the country just for that....free health care. Don't you see? No country offers free health care to anyone in the world who can get in through the borders. No country can afford that. It's also cruel to working class Americans who don't qualify for Medicaid...to give free health care to non-citizens. What does that tell hard working blue collar Americans with no health care? No, it doesn't make sense, and we can't afford it. Everyone sympathizes with anyone in the world without health care (including Americans), but that doesn't mean we can provide it free of charge for them.

[Demsrule86]

43. Um...that was my point. However, you can't let people in your custody die.

[thesquanderer]

42. The question was easily misinterpreted.

They did not raise their hands to "will your plan provide free coverage to undocumented immigrants?" It was. "Raise your hand if–if your government plan would provide coverage for undocumented immigrants." -- All ten raised their hands, to great applause besides, which was kind of shocking.

To Mayor Pete's credit (and he was the first to speak after the show of hands), he explained that--at least in his plan--it's an insurance policy and the people would be buying into it, like anyone else. But that wasn't in the question, and to a casual watcher, I think it came across like everyone raising their hands for "free health care for undocumented immigrants." And I agree, that would play badly. There is a big difference between "everyone should be able to buy into it" which is well defensible compared to "everyone gets covered, period" which will turn off a whole lot of voters, and I think that distinction got lost, in part because not everyone's hand-raising answer necessarily meant the same thing, because not everyone supports the same plan. The question needed a qualifier... "Raise your hand if your government plan would provide coverage for undocumented immigrants IF THEY PAY FOR THAT COVERAGE." That deserves 10 raised hands, but unqualified, it's dicey, and we really don't know exactly how each candidate interpreted it. As long as they are paying for the coverage, most people who are not already committed to Trump would probably be okay if these folks got the benefit they are paying for, but if they are not paying for it, I think many would say that they are not entitled to any health benefits beyond the E.R. (and many people mistakenly believe that immigrants don't pay any taxes as it is).

[Demsrule86]

44. NO, some folks can't get coverage in states that block medicaid expansion and they would not be OK

with it...dangerous for sure.

[thesquanderer]

45. Even today, anybody can get coverage of some kind, if they are willing to pay for it.

And Buttigieg (and the other candidates who raised their hands I'm sure) are fine with even undocumented immigrants getting coverage under their plans if they pay for that coverage. And I don't think that would be too controversial, except to the most rabid anti-immigrants who are going to be Trump voters anyway. So I'm not sure what your point here is.

The ambiguity comes from how you handle the healthcare of undocumented immigrants who don't buy into the system, that's where I think you can easily lose a lot of popular support. Which is further complicated if one doesn't buy into it through a specific healthcare premium, but rather, through some other tax mechanism.

[Demsrule86]

23. You nailed it...that is exactly how it is...politicians show up at election time.

And while the rest of the country prospered as we climbed out of recession...it didn't happen here.

[Turin_C3PO]

2. Good article.

It explains that we have to get everything right in order to win in 2020. We must win back two time Obama voters who turned around and voted Trump. Also we must increase African American turnout in the swing states.

It ends by saying Michelle Obama would be our ideal candidate. I agree.

[Honeycombe8]

13. I think empathy is a big deal.

A candidate just recognizing a group of people, their issues. Remember Bill Clinton's "I feel your pain"? The worst thing for a voter is to feel invisible. They'll go to whoever says "I see you. I hear you. You are as important as anyone else in this country."

[Turin_C3PO]

15. Yes, I agree.

It’s not so much about ideology but about, what you said, empathy and charisma too.

[Honeycombe8]

11. Interesting take on things. I'll have to think on this.

Some I agree with, but I'm not so sure about other things.

[marylandblue]

17. Warren was a special ed teacher. You need a lot of empathy to do that job.

[BeyondGeography]

18. She scores very high in both departments

Authenticity and empathy. The third is “credible agent for change,” where she is unsurpassed in my not so impartial opinion.

[Demsrule86]

24. She does not speak the language of the mid west and has tacked left on too many issues to win the

mid west. And anyone who wants to make private insurance illegal will not win here.

[marylandblue]

33. That has nothing to do with empathy or special ed. teachers.

Do they not like empathy in the mid west?

[Demsrule86]

34. It has to do with winning an election...and when was she a Kindergarten teacher...years and years

ago?

[Demsrule86]

36. Not that kind...she will be considered...New York or East Coast...and her positions won't work here.

Hey I would vote for her in a general...I like her. But I want someone as nominee who can win the states we need.

[marylandblue]

39. Your missing the point. You have to be an empathetic person to be a special ed. teacher.

It's not something you learn, you have to be born with it. If you don't have it, you won't last one day in a special ed. classroom. That's my entire point. Whether people in Michigan will vote for someone from Massachusetts is a good topic for a different thread.

[Politicub]

46. People in the Midwest aren't stupid simpletons

That’s how the “only Biden can win” posts make them sound. They will have lived under four years of Trump and will decide to vote on whether or not his approach is working for them.

From what I’m seeing, when people are exposed to Warren, they connect with her. She has momentum precisely because she’s gaining more visibility and exposure to people. She’s likeable and sincere.

But I am not someone who takes it as an article of faith that only Biden can save us. The electable argument has always been spurious. Because someone leads in polls months before a vote will be cast means very little.

Warren is working tirelessly for every vote. I don’t see that with Biden. Biden doesn’t seem to grasp modern campaigning. He will drop a slickly produced video and give a speech somewhere and then he disappears for days at a time.

Slickly produced videos are nice and all, but they need to be part of a broader communications strategy.

I am holding Biden to a high standard. But it’s not higher than the standard I’m holding for the other nominees. I want Biden to wow people. He has had some good ideas but doesn’t follow through on selling them. I don’t know why that is.

If he is the standard bearer, he will need to work as tirelessly as Warren to win. I will be pleased to see it when he starts doing that.

[Indygram]

19. That's a big part of why I am all in for Beto

Warren comes across as pretty authentic too. Her positions are too far left for me, though, being a moderate. I don't get that authentic vibe from most of the candidates, sadly.

[BeyondGeography]

20. It's extremely important

And for good reason. From an average voter perspective, there aren’t many meaningful differences on the issues between candidates. Authenticity comes down to trust, basically. Candidates who have it can go far.

[Demsrule86]

25. That is not true...the ACA with a public option (winner) is far different than private insurance

should be illegal. The positions many of the candidates have taken will cost them the general in 20. They will lose the rust belt.

[Indygram]

29. That's one of the main reasons I disagree with her

But I do believe that she's authentic and she really believes in what she calls for. That authenticity really helps her a lot but some of her positions hurt her in a general.

[Demsrule86]

30. I agree with that. I like Elizabeth Warren.

[Demsrule86]

37. I find her authentic also and I like her.

[Demsrule86]

26. It does come down to trust...and Warren and Harris will not win the that from the rustbelt...

not picking on them...they are in the top 3. VP Biden helped Pres. Obama with this area...he speaks their language which is why he has a good chance of beating Trump. In my opinion,the only chance.

[Skya Rhen]

32. I have no doubt that Biden will have the opportunity to prove that he can win the rustbelt in the

General because he will win these same states (in addition to most of the red states) in the Primaries, thereby providing him with the most delegates.

The rustbelt and red states will make Joe the Democratic nominee, whether we like it or not....


Florida (Biden 47.4%, Warren 11.8%, Buttigieg 8.4%) 219 delegates
http://stpetepolls.org/files/StPetePolls_2019_State_DEM_Pres_June23_I63R.pdf

Pennsylvania (Biden 39%, Sanders 13%, Warren 8%) 153 delegates
https://poll.qu.edu/pennsylvania/release-detail?ReleaseID=2620

South Carolina (Biden 45%, Sanders 18%, Warren 8%) 54 delegates
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByVu4fDHYJgVNFB2S3h5MUQzUzVDNjBQaExTdkZDQ0RGcTU4/view

Ohio (Biden 29%. Sanders 19%, Warren 12%) 136 delegates
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primaries/democratic/ohio/

Texas (Biden 30%, O'Rourke 16%, Sanders 15%) 228 delegates
https://poll.qu.edu/texas/release-detail?ReleaseID=2625

North Carolina (Biden 39%, Sanders 22%, Warren 15%) 110 delegates
http://emersonpolling.com/2019/06/04/north-carolina-2020-biden-with-early-lead-on-trump-and-democratic-primary-field/

Virginia (Biden 36%, Sanders 17%, Warren 13%) 99 delegates
news.hamptonu.edu/release/Nationally-Recognized-Hampton-University-Center-for-Public-Policy%27s-Latest-Poll-Shows-Biden-Leads-Crowded-Democratic-Presidential-Nominee-Pack

Wisconsin (Biden 28%, Sanders 13%, Warren 14%) 77 delegates
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primaries/democratic/wisconsin/

Indiana (Biden 33%, Sanders 23%, Buttigieg 20%) 70 delegates
http://www.weaskamerica.com/surveys/2019/5/9/indiana-statewide-survey-of-registered-voters

Arizona (Biden 35%, Sanders 16%, Warren 10%) 67 delegates
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primaries/democratic/arizona/

Mississippi (Biden 50%, Sanders 7%, Warren 7%) 36 delegates
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primaries/democratic/mississippi/

[Demsrule86]

35. I agree with your analysis...thanks for going to all the trouble of finding the data... you rock.

[highplainsdem]

47. +1,000,000. Thank you for posting all those links!