We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
WHILE ACRIMONY AND inertia reigned in Washington DC in recent weeks, to the severe detriment of hundreds of thousands of federal employees (and millions more who depend on a fully functioning United States government for their livelihoods) a host of aspirants entered the fray to be the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee in 2020.
There will soon be more too – looking to raise big dollars and to bring on board the best political consultants and seasoned local operatives.
Indeed, the field could feature up to two dozen notable and accomplished men and women who are diverse in every fashion.
It is improbable that there will be that many candidates in the end, but at least that number of quite serious people are examining the feasibility of a run and considering whether a realistic path to the nomination exists.
It would approach a book-length tome to give each of their chances a fair airing.
So at this admittedly early stage – the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary are more than a year off – what follows is an attempt to devise groups of similar travellers and to make a salient observation or two about what may be ahead of them.
Household names
The first group might aptly be labelled the senior figures with household names. Former vice president Joe Biden is the 850 pound gorilla lurking around the ring at this incipient stage.
He remains very popular among all of his party’s core constituencies, has reams of experience and still appeals to voters in Middle America who have little time for most leading Democrats.
That said, his advanced age is an issue and he knows it. A reported informal outreach to former congressman Beto O’Rourke as a possible running mate suggests as much. Moreover, his role in the infamous 1991 hearings on Clarence Thomas’s nomination to the United States Supreme Court would be the subject of intense scrutiny.
Some of the die-hard followers of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders desperately want to see him run again. There is an undeniable base that would support him no matter what.
He is even older than Biden, though, and recent revelations of allegedly widespread sexual harassment in his 2016 insurgent campaign won’t go down well in the #MeToo era.
Senator Elizabeth Warren is the sole (all but) declared candidate in this first group. She has been a formidable advocate for struggling Americans both before and after her election to public office.
She is highly-regarded by progressives and has courted African and Latino Americans. But Warren is engulfed in a major controversy.
She has claimed to have Native American heritage and was listed by her employer, Harvard Law School, as a member of a minority.
Following DNA testing, experts interpreted the results as meaning that she had a Native American ancestor, 6-10 generations ago, while others argued there is no way to tell from DNA testing when the claim is so distant.
If primary voters have electability in mind when they choose someone to oppose (presumably) President Donald Trump, will they back Warren, when many people think she relied on the dubious heritage claim to obtain her privileged position at Harvard?
This widely held supposition is somewhat unfair, yet so is politics, and it isn’t going away.
Senators, governors & congressmen
The second category is the hard-charging pack: senators, governors and congressmen among them.
Senator Kamala Harris made a big splash when she confirmed that she was jumping in. The daughter of immigrants from Jamaica and India and a former head prosecutor, Harris is a favourite of many in the liberal wing of the party and of young women, in particular.
She is a Californian and, this time around, that state’s heft will be felt far more strongly because its primary has moved forward from June to March.
Against all of that, less enamoured Democrats will wonder if she can win over hearts and minds in the American heartland, where the Electoral College contest will as always be decided, especially given the sitting president’s demonstrated capacity for exploiting racial tensions.
The rationale behind the increasingly likely challenge of another senator, Sherrod Brown, can be found in one indispensable word: Ohio. President Trump won Ohio rather comfortably and most commentators now say that the state is just about red.
Nonetheless, the unabashed progressive Brown beat his conservative foe handily last November at the same time as a Republican unexpectedly cruised to victory over a Democrat to win the contenst to become the state’s governor.
Brown asserts that his sceptical attitude to so-called free trade deals means that he is the only Democrat who can definitely win Ohio and Pennsylvania. On the other hand, any area he inhabits is a charisma-free zone and he has little national profile.
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, who has moved steadily leftward after initially casting herself as a moderate and evidently thrives on battling the president, has formally announced. It remains to be seen whether the party will select another New Yorker after Hilary Clinton’s loss.
The able and articulate senator from neighbouring New Jersey, Cory Booker, could encounter similar difficulties.
Northeastern states will back the Democratic nominee in 2020. Thus, some of the party faithful who want to deny Trump a second term at all costs may be tempted to back someone from elsewhere. This could be a negative for a New Jersey hopeful just as much as for a New York resident.
The thoughtful, low-key Minnesotan, Amy Klobuchar, could get in as well.
Terry McAuliffe of Virginia, Jay Inslee of Washington and John Hickenlooper of Colorado are the most often mentioned sitting or former governors in the mix.
McAuliffe’s very close connections with the Clintons will not work to his benefit and Inslee is a totally unknown quantity outside his home state.
Hickenlooper, a centrist from Colorado, who had a private sector career before entering politics, could emerge as a dark horse in the event he runs. He is rather different to most of the rest and that can be a valuable asset in a large field.
Beto O’Rourke, who excited Democratic activists and fundraisers across the country in his hard-fought loss to Senator Ted Cruz in Texas, is regarded as a top contender and seems to be planning a run.
This time, however, the man hailed by some as ‘the next Obama’ will be competing against plenty of men and women with equally solid progressive credentials and resonating themes – not trying to pull off a one on one upset win over the most despised politician on Capitol Hill.
To go from losing a Senate election to prevailing in a national Democratic presidential primary is also a very steep climb.
Long shots
Finally, there are the long(ish) shots who cannot be dismissed. Julian Castro, Tulsi Gabbard and Mitch Landrieu are three worth watching.
Castro, former mayor of San Antonio and a cabinet secretary in the Obama administration, is a Mexican American with an inspiring life story.
Gabbard is a Hawaii congresswoman and military veteran who drew attention in the past for bucking the Democratic establishment, primarily on consensus US policy in the Middle East.
And Landrieu, the former mayor of New Orleans and lieutenant governor of Louisiana, has won elections in unfriendly territory.
Perhaps the most intriguing long shot is the 37-year-old mayor of relatively tiny South Bend, Indiana, Pete Buttigieg.
A Harvard graduate and Rhodes Scholar, who served in Afghanistan and is an openly gay married man, Buttigieg touts a straightforward message: ‘Ours is the party of everyday life’. It is a well-conceived riposte to President Trump’s simple, effective sloganeering.
Prominent Democrats, such as strategist David Axelrod, while terming him “the longest of long shots,” believe he has a promising future.
At any rate, everyone would be wise to remember that someone, who was once a very long shot, presently resides in the White House.
It is extraordinary that a piece naming 16 men and women as viable seekers of the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination is per se incomplete. Fans of those omitted here can doubtless articulate valid justifications for why their choice warranted inclusion. Fair enough.
The common refrain these days is that this is, in myriad ways, an unprecedented time in American politics.
Accordingly, the halfway point of this president’s tumultuous first term might be far too late to be issuing warnings. But buckle up all the same. The race to take the fight to Donald Trump is set to be a fascinating, topsy-turvy ride.
Larry Donnelly is a Boston attorney, a Law Lecturer at NUI Galway and a political columnist with TheJournal.ie.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
The democrats scored the biggest own goal of all time by picking Hilary over Bernie Sanders.she had to much baggage and was not as likable it looks like whoever they pick now won’t matter as Donald has to be favourite to land the gig again
Dow Jones hit 25,000 again yesterday. Gone from 19,797 on Trumps inauguration date to highs never seen before. Good for both the Us and world economy. You won’t see any positive reporting it though. Pathetic
@Toby Fish: very true, news sites are so negative, sure when Obama was inaugurated the first time the Dow Jones was at 7550 and rose to over 19000 by the time he left office, but that’s too positive for the media.
@Toby Fish: Yeah but orange man bad. TV says so
@Brian Scott: that is also true. But would have been positively reported on. Only negative news regarding Trump. Im just calling it as I see it
@Toby Fish: So trumps finacial polocies all of which are bad fr MAerica and the erst of the world kicked in on his inauguration day?? Also why are americans coming to a small Irish website to comment??
@Rob Cahill: to put it simply . If the American economy is fooked then the world economy is fooked.
@Toby Fish: The DOW already hit 25,000 last January and then Trump started a trade war causing it to plummet. So there’s been zero change in the DOW since last January, please stop cherrypicking your facts from Trump’s Twitter page.
@Toby Fish: The main reason DOW Jones went up so erratically is the lowering of the tax paid. So if you got some shares you ought to get some better yields, however, that doesn’t always translate into real wages for the working and you got less money to finance schools, hospitals, infrastructure… and at the end he doesn’t have the money to build the wall. The tax break money is gonna be missing somewhere.
@Toby Fish: Nothing like a good old fashioned economic bubble
@Phil Ellison: Tightening fed policy has had a much greater effect on stock prices than Trump’s trade policies. It works in the opposite direction too, when rates are low stock prices rise. There’s no money to be made leaving your money on deposit if rates are low. Basic economic theory.
Doesn’t really matter who it is. The Identity Politics cancer has fully infected the Democratic Party. Watch them disappear even further down the rabbit hole of intersectionality and all its massive contradictions, then blame white people when the “inexplicably” lose.
@jacquoranda: I use to think that but look at what happened in the last primaries. Trump ran a very populist campaign. He copied a lot of sanders. Trump supporters have been polled a lot and they seem to agree a lot with what Bernie Sanders says. I think they want real change and neither party wants it.
@Carlin Ite: copying Sanders?! Nah. No.
@jacquoranda: Identity politics is prevalent on either side. Unfortunately, you can almost assume that someone who is pro-gun in American, will also be pro-life, even though the two issues have nothing to do with each other. Conservatives are just as susceptible to identity politics as liberals.
@Phil Ellison: that’s not what identity politics means.
@Early Cuyler: not on everything but he did. trump spoke to the room, if his retrorockets wasn’t working he would change it. Look at his speeches during the primaries. When he needed to bash wall st he did and when he did he copied Sanders
@Early Cuyler: not on everything but he did. trump spoke to the room, if his retrorockets wasn’t working he would change it. Look at his speeches during the primaries. When he needed to bash wall st he did and when he did he copied Sanders. Sanders believes what he says though.
Apparently Clinton is thinking about giving it another go. She’s nuts
@PC Principal: she’s a genuinely horrible person. Democrats can do better. If they want to challenge Trump they need a fresh face. Someone more centre thinking. A move away from the overly Pc and im offended by everything culture. This will bring back those who are on the fence
@Toby Fish: That would be the sensible move but they’re moving further and further to the left. They’ve had 3 years to get their act together and learn from the last time but they’re out of touch
@Toby Fish: Trump is a genuinely horrible person too. Granted he doesn’t try to hide it but the fact remains. I doubt he will win in 2020 but I also doubt anyone the Dems have put forward so far will either.
The Democrats chose Hillary Clinton in 2016 to represent them because she was the abortion candidate.
She lost because she was the abortion candidate.
Over the last few weeks the State of New York controlled by the Democrat party introduced legislation that legalised partial birth abortion.
Other Democrat controlled States are about to follow suit.
The Governor of one of those States will be chosen as the next Democrat candidate and he or she will lose again because they will use abortion as the central plank of their campaign.
It will not matter if the Republican party put up Donald Trump or Donald Duck as their candidate, they will win because the Democrats have learned nothing from the 2016 election.
@Garry Coll: she lost because she was the abortion candidate ? Source for this claim of yours ?
Over the last few weeks the State of New York introduced legalised ‘partial birth abortion’ <- why lie ?
@Garry Coll: She won 3 million more votes than Trump.
She lost the electoral college but the slimmest of margins.
Dislike Clinton all you like but her stance on abortion isn’t the reason she lost.
@Garry Coll:
Francis, does your mother still spoon feed you? If you think I’m wrong do your own research.
Bob, I think Easons do a Ladybird book, you know for the intellectually challenged, that gives an idiots guide to the American Presidential election process. If you’re still no wiser after reading it, get back to me.
@Garry Coll: I feed myself extremely well :-) Now,why did you lie ?
@Bob Earner: You said that she won 3 million more votes than Trump -correct..
you also said that she lost the electoral college by the slimmest of margins – correct ..i do believe that it was under 80,000 votes
you also said that her stance on abortion isn’t the reason that she lost – correct ..there was many other reasons.
look like Gary is struggling..
@Francis Mc Carthy:
No lie. https://www.pop.org/new-york-state-to-allow-abortion-up-to-birth/
@Francis Mc Carthy:
Even on any slim margin she lost, but neither she nor her apostles can accept the fact.
I know that there were many factors in her defeat, I am just picking the most obvious one.
If you want to list the rest of the reasons why she lost, rather than the excuses she has come up with since, then maybe the Democrats will have a chance in 2020.
But it seems that they, and you, are in a permanent state of denial, not a good place to start the next campaign.
@Garry Coll: Excellent source there,kiddo :-)
try again
@Francis Mc Carthy:
I don’t know what you are trying to prove with that link Francis, but it’s a spectacular fail of heroic proportions on the topic we’re discussing.
@Garry Coll: You trying to be intellectiually superior to others.. lol
@Garry Coll: I’m proving that you get your info from highly biased sources,Gary ,so it’s not a heroic fail on my part.What is a huge fail on your part,is that there is no such medical term as a partial-birth abortion.True story,Gary :-)
By the way,the new law will help women like Erica Christinson to be able to procure a safe,legal abortion in her own state ..
This is her story ;
https://jezebel.com/interview-with-a-woman-who-recently-had-an-abortion-at-1781972395
we all know that ye forced birthers would have made her go to full term
@Francis Mc Carthy: Be reasonable for once. I’m pro-life but support anyone’s decision to terminate within an appropriate time frame. But now it’s acceptable to abort immediately before birth, and sometimes after the baby has been born? That’s man slaughter
I just putting up factual information PC Principal.How about you do the same :-)
Lets have a discussion ; the lady in the piece above,she found out at 31 weeks that the ‘baby boy’ that she was carrying wouldn’t be able to breathe outside of the womb & would not survive.Are you telling me that you would stop her from ending her & her ‘baby boys’ physical/mental suffering ?
ps; please provide a link which will prove that Dr’s in NY will now be “killing babies after the baby has been born” ?
@Francis Mc Carthy: Point taken, but Is that where this ends though? Why not use the same rule for Down’s syndrome? Can you think of a certain German leader who had similar ideas?
This all started with termination at 20 weeks in “rare circumstances”. Now look where we are a short time later. Give an inch and a mile will be taken
@Francis Mc Carthy: To answer your other question
https://twitter.com/calebjhull/status/1090657473218920448?s=21
@PC Principal: That was not in New York,it was in Vancover.
Politicians have a habit of opening their mouths and coming out with something outrageous,which is something that that politician did..
@PC Principal: I remember a German leader that brought in higher penalties for the “Ayran women” if they went & procured an abortion.
Geography is over-emphasised in US politics. Trump won the Presidency despite not winning his home state (granted his opponent was a Senator for New York, although from Illinois and with Arkansas associations). Al Gore would have won the Presidency if he had won Tennessee, but geography couldn’t save him.
US politics is now split along cultural lines (religion, abortion etc.) and ethnic lines. Geography comes a poor third.
I heard Kamala Harris Town Hall the other day. Sounded like a mix of Clinton in 92 and Obama in 2006/07. Look how they turned out. I hope they get a progressive. Pity Ojeda stepped down. I know he couldn’t possibly win but having him speaking on the same stage as the likes of Harris, Biden, Gabbard during debates would have been good.
The border wall
@James Carpenter: yeah I think Canada need it more than America at this stage.
Trump hasn’t delivered on some of the key promises that he made during his election scampaign.”Obamacare” hasn’t been repealed.No “healthcare for everyone”.In fact,there is millions of people that don’t have health insurance anymore .Drug prices didn’t go down,the opposite is happening.No wall.Mexico ain’t going to pay for it.Hillary hasn’t been locked up.Some members of his team have been, though.Coal mines have been closing faster under his administration than they were under Obama’s.And now with the Democrats in control of the Congress,they also are in control of the purse strings.Oh,and Nancy is kicking the lame-duck president’s butt :-)
Trump coverage is horribly one sided for sure but he is indefensible at this stage. Pointing to the economy and stock market gains after dropping the corporate tax rate by 14% is pathetic, particularly given that the growth trend was already in effect. Had the economy NOT experienced this bump that they would be better looking at establishing an agrarian society.
I love Trump for his entertainment, but apart from being a master media manipulator there is not one string to his bow. The man is an imbecile and to argue otherwise is to ignore reality the way he does.
The problem the Democrats now face is they have spent huge time and effort in trying to bring Trump down to little or no avail, they are seen as bad losers who can not accept that they got it so badly wrong with Hillary. They should have immediately started looking for new bright candidates and started to develop them for the next presidential race, now they are playing catch up and it may be too little too late.
They’ll rig it and choose Warren over Sanders . She’ll tow the party line I think. Voted to boost military spending lol. That’s not progressive
Dick Cheney
have your say