On the Democratic Race for the Nomination

Many machinations are at work currently in the race for the Democratic nomination.  Several candidates have dropped out, one has just entered, and currently there are still eight(?) candidates running for the Democratic nomination.  While the candidates are campaigning and debating, states are having their primary votes and caucuses, each with their own convoluted sets of rules and processes.  These are the things we see, the headlines that grace our news feeds day in and day out.
What is less talked about is the planning and strategizing at both the individual candidate level and the national party level.  The reason for this is apparent of course, no candidate wants to share their playbook.  But the results of these decisions made behind the scenes do make their way to the public eye, and so let’s look at the outlier events to see what may, and I stress may, be the reasons behind them.This will be an ongoing series.  As I read the articles, and listen to the candidates, pundits, friends and strangers, my views change and evolve.  I learn things and think about them.  These are my thoughts.

Lets Talk about Bloomberg.  The entrance of Bloomberg bears noting for a couple of reasons.  The first being that he is a late entrant and the second being he’s a candidate who hasn’t even been on a primary ballot to date.  The obvious question is why?  On Bloomberg’s part, it may be that along with billions of dollars comes an ego to match.  Surrounded by yes men (admittedly an assumption on my part), he may feel that he should be president simply because he wants it.  Safe guarding his low tax rates may be a driving motive, a sincere if flawed patriotic belief that he would make a better president may also play a part, or a myriad of other thought processes could have led him to enter.  All of these are internal forces specific to Mike Bloomberg himself.  But internal forces may not be the only thing to consider.   

Bloomberg’s entrance into the race did coincide with the acknowledgement of Bernie’s rise by several media outlets, and undoubtedly by the democratic establishment as well.  It may be that the Democratic Party leadership provided some gentle coaxing or perhaps outright asked him to join.  So what benefit does Bloomberg provide to the greater Party?  The first thing that comes to mind is that by comparison, he makes the other candidates appear further left than they are.  In a time of populism, appearing left of center is a good place to be for Democrats.  When Bloomberg ran for Mayor in 2001 he switched to the Republican Party, then to Independent in 2007 before returning to the Democratic Party in 2018 tin order to enter the presidential race.  Bloomberg certainly makes the other non-Bernie candidates look more leftist by contrast without said candidates being required to actually move left.

The establishment may like him because they think he could actually win.  I disagree but only time will tell.  A Bloomberg administration would certainly maintain the status quo of the Capital Hill serving the donor class as opposed the the working class and ensuring current politicians keep their jobs. Winning reelection is much easier when the required prerequisite is a privately funded campaign coffer versus having done a good job for your voting constituents. 

My personal experience tells me a Bloomberg nomination would doom the country to four more years of Trump.  What he and his supporters in the halls of power fail to realize, is that by much of the country he is viewed as the problem, and by much, I mean both Democrats and Republicans.  Working class Republicans voted for Trump because they were sick of money in politics.  There were other reasons too, some saw a racist figure head, some saw an astute business man, but the most prevalent in my experience is that he wasn't "of Washinton" meaning they felt he wasn't tied into the schemes and dealings of the Washington aristocrats.  Bloomberg, as it pertains to the Primaries, doesn't have the luxury of that trust from the constituents.  Many people, namely Sanders supporters see him as the exact problem they attempted to solve in 2016.  The Sanders camp sees money in politics as the number one issue, the issue that must be solved before any other in order for future solutions to be fair and just. 

Does this mean that Sanders supporters won't vote for anyone but Sanders?  Absolutely not.  Many, myself included supported Elizabeth Warren for a time and would have gladly voted for her, all the way up until she started collecting money from super PACs and falling into the same old rhythmic trap.  With money in politics as THE key issue for so many, Bloomberg is the absolute worst pic.  Much has been made of healthcare, immigration and foreign policy on the debate stages, with very few if any questions regarding corruption, but I assure you, the corrupting influence of money in Washington is still a deciding factor for many voters, both Republican and Democrat alike.  Accordingly Bloomberg will not only fail to bring crossover votes to the Dem ticket, his nomination will undoubtedly ensure vast swathes of Dem voters stay home as well.    

More to come in the days ahead.