4th Democratic Debate Grades and New Rankings

There were profound events in the world this week. The President of the United States left an ally to be slaughtered by Turkish militias. He did this because his lazy, weak and corrupt.  Tonight's debate should have focused on that, but it did not.

That said, this debate was more substantive than the earlier debates. The biggest headline is that Warren took a lot of flak, as befits her status as the new front-runner. As for how she did, the news is mixed. Overall she did not do great. But there might be a silver lining in this-the folks who did best at attacking her, are pretty far back in the polls. 

As with the previous debates, I'll give a tactical and a strategic grade for each candidate.  And in  day or two I will update my rankings of the candidates.

WINNERS:

1. Amy Klobuchar   Tactical: A  Strategic: A

If you read this blog regularly-and there are at least six of you who do, then you know Klobuchar is my preferred candidate. Tonight she was the only person who mentioned Trump's betrayal of the Kurds  in the first hour of the debate. She also did a good job of pointing out the weaknesses of Warren's policies and campaign.  She needed a big night and she really should get a bounce from it. I don't think it will be enough to get her near the top but I hope it's enough to get her in the next debate.

2. Pete Buttigieg  Tactical:  A-  Strategic A

Solid on all points. An adult and a skilled debater. I am beginning to think he might be ready for this job after all. (And I never thought I would say that.)

3. Bernie Sanders  Tactical:  A- Strategic:  A-

Bernie had one important job tonight-look healthy.  He did that. And he wasn't bad on the substance, given how played out his shtick is.  No harm done to him tonight and he might rebound from a recent dip.

4. Cory Booker   Tactical:  B+   Strategic:  A-

Cory usually plays the voice of reason and he did again tonight. But he never seems to get traction after his strong performances, in part because he usually says something annoying. Tonight he brought up his veganism three times.  That is four times too many.

5  (TIE) Julian Castro and Beto O'Rourke   Tactical: B+  Strategic:  B+

They were fine. But I don't see either of them rocketing up the ranks anytime soon.

7. Andrew Yang  Tactical: B  Strategic: B

He's not a serious candidate, so I don't grade him based on whether he's going to be president. But he made some good points and probably will raise some more money for his future podcast and multi-level marketing empire.

8.  Joe Biden    Tactical: B  Strategic:  C

Joe avoided any huge gaffes, which counts for something but it's impossible to watch him speak for even one minute without thinking about his age.  He gets visibly confused in ways that make me uncomfortable.  I don't know if there is a solution to that.

9. Elizabeth Warren   Tactical:  C+  Strategic:  B-

She looked evasive and even duplicitous in her half-assed explanation/defense of Medicare for All plan. 

10. Kamala Harris  Tactical: B-  Strategic:  C-

She went for some very easy applause line on reproductive choice by saying things that literally everyone on the stage agrees with. But then she really went hard at Elizabeth Warren on the silliest issue possible-banning Donald Trump from Twitter.  That diminishes her already fading candidacy.

11. Tom Steyer:  Tactical:   C  Strategic:  C

The moderators were correct to give him the bare minimum of attention and he did his best to make them not regret that decision.  Some of his answers were delivered competently. He's obviously been rehearsing for this moment. He had a neat thing of starting every answer with a compliment of someone other candidate.  But this is the saddest middle age crisis I've ever been forced to watch on television.  If he wanted to do good with his fortune, he has a ton of options.  This verkhakta campaign ain't one. 

12. Tulsi Gabbard  Tactical:  Incomplete  Strategic: Incomplete

She is loathsome. But I can't grade her fairly because I'm not sure what her objective is. Maybe she wants to be the presidential nominee of the Democratic party. Maybe she wants to build some kind of political movement based on.....God knows what. But she did nothing to dispel rumors/conspiracy thinking that she intends to run as an independent or third party candidate.

I want to state that I was and am firmly opposed to our military invasion of Iraq. But for her to act like Trump's betrayal of the Kurds was a price worth paying for bringing 1,000 soldiers home* is despicable.

*They are not coming home yet. They are going to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, because the Saudi government is renting them from a man who thinks our military is a revenue center and our soldiers are Hessians. 

2020 Democratic Field, Take 4

The big news this week is of course the Mueller Report. My impression is that the report demonstrates multiple instances where the president obstructed justice.  The spinning of this report by Attorney General Barr was exteremely disingenuous. In a just world, Barr would resign in shame.  But that is not the world we live in.

The next big event will be hearings and the testimony of Robert Mueller (and, to a less extent, Donald McGahn) will probably determine whether or not there will be impeachment hearings. If there are hearings, then the president will probably be impeached.  Then it will be up to the senate.  I think it's very unlikely that Trump would be convicted in a senate trial but the process should go forward.

If I had to bet right now, I would say that the President will be impeached by the House but not convicted by the Senate. In fact, I think the Senate might simply refuse to hold a trial at all.  That means he will most likely still be President a year from now. He will almost certainly run for re-election and if so, he will be the nominee of the Republican Party.  Now, to the Democrats and their enormous field of mostly mediocre candidates.

I. THE SPIDERSTUMBLED BLOG POWER RANKINGS.

This section is just about me. These are my ranked preferences among the likely candidates.  If their standing has changed since the first rankings, I put their number from the previous iteration of this list in parenthesis.  Bold indicates that the candidate has already announced that they are running.

Tip of the 40 ounce to Terry McCauliffe, Chris Murphy, Andrew Cuomo, Mitch Landrieu, and Andrew Steyer who decided to sit this race out since I last published my rankings.

Four That I Would be Enthused About:
1. Amy Klobuchar. 
2. Elizabeth Warren  (4)
She continues to impress me with her attention to detail and creative energy. If this race was determined purely on substantive issues, I think she would win the nomination and the election. But her poll numbers continue to disappoint and her fundraising numbers were lackluster for the first quarter. I hope she stays viable and gains some traction. She has earned it.
3. Kamala Harris  (2)
She is running a cautious race so far. I think she knows that she has the money and resume to stay viable and she wants to spend 2019 avoiding any incidents that might jeopardize that.
4. Beto O'Rourke  (3)
Also underwhelming so far. He needs to step up his game to the national stage.

Seven That I Would Be Happy With:
5. Julian Castro (14)
This is a big jump in a tremendous field. I like his temperament and presentation so far. He strikes me as someone that will benefit from the debates, in a way similar to how John Kasich moved up the Republican polls in 2016 after just barely qualifying for the main stage of the first debate. 
6. Kristin Gillibrand 
I am close to writing her off. A lot of Democrats hold her principled position on Al Franken against her, which is a shame. But a senator from New York state should be better able to raise funds and attract press. 
7. Steve Bullock (8)  No sign that he's running but I'll leave him in for now.
8. Joe Biden 
He has baggage and is a older than I think is ideal for a president, but I think his political instincts will serve him will. He has been wise to delay the announcement because he has the name recognition to allow him the luxury of sitting out the silly season. 
9. John Hickenlooper (12)
10. Jay Inslee (13)
11. Tim Ryan

Four That Mean Something Went Wrong But Okay, Sure:
12. Pete Buttigieg (18)
Became a media darling by saying yes to everything. His novelty is just about to wear off, I expect, but he'll hang around for the voting, no matter what.
13. John Delaney (Unranked)
14.  Corey Booker (17)
15. Eric Swalwell (Unranked)

Four That Well, I Won't Vote For Trump, So Fingers Crossed.
16. Seth Moulton (Unranked)
17. Andrew Yang (Unranked)
18.  Bernie Sanders (19)
19.  Wayne Messam (Unranked)

Three WHAT THE FUCK?
20. Marianne Wilamson (Unranked)
21. Mike Gravel (Unranked)
22. Tulsi Gabbard

II.  The 2020 Hourse Race.

Here is what the polling shows so far: Bernie and Biden each have about a quarter of the party ready to support them. Everyone else is stuck in single digits. Buttigieg has out performed expectations and is currently in third place in most polls.  Harris, Warren, O'Rourke, Booker and Klobuchar have yet to gain traction but they are the middle of the pack for now.  Gillibrand, Inslee, Hickenlooper and all of the House members are the bottom tier for now. Below them, there are a handful of celebrity and novelty candidates who are just running for attention.

Because the field is so large, it might be helpful to try to think of which candidates could compete for certain voters. There are countless factors that this could be broken down by but I think the #1 issue for Democrats next year will be simple-Remove Donald Trump for office. So I think it's useful to think of these "lanes" in terms of what their appeal will be in the general election. If you like, you can think of these lanes as Left, Moderate and Centrist. But I think it's more interesting to think of them in terms of what voting blocs they would appeal to in the general election if they were the nominee.

In 2016 Donald Trump exceeded Mitt Romney's 2012 vote total but just over 2 million votes. Hillary Clinton's  vote total was just 65,000 less than Barack Obama in 2012 or about 4 million less than Obama's 2008 total.

The dramatic shifts in voting patterns happened among the other candidates in the field.  The Green Party and Libertarian parties nominated, respectively, Jill Stein and Gary Johnson in 2012 and 2106. The Greens increased their vote total by just under one million votes. The Libertarians increased theirs by over 3.2 million votes. Additionally, Evan McMullin got over 700,000 votes running as right-wing independent. (The 5th place finisher in 2012 got only 120K votes.)

The 2008 Obama Coaltion was an electoral marvel. It sucked up every electoral college vote that was in play. It damn near won Missouri. It held together enough to win in 2012 but it did not hold for 2016. For the rest of the 2020 cycle my analysis will discuss these three segments of the Obama Diaspora: 1. Trump or Stayed Homes 2. Soft Libertarians 3. Protest Greens.

1. SOFT LIBERTARIANS: (3.9 Million voters)

Voters who went Libertarian (or McMullin) in 2012 but not in 2012.

These are mostly people who are right of center that could not bring themselves to vote for either Trump or Hillary. I expect that Trump has won over a fair amount of them. The Democrats would win a lot of them if they nominate a centrist like Biden, but I don't think they will turn out for Bernie or anyone they perceive as either corrupt or inexperienced.

2. TRUMP OR STAYED HOME (3.7 million voters)

Obama 2008 voters who didn't vote for Hillary in 2016.

There are two sub-demographics in this group.

A. People who were upset with George W. Bush in 2008 and gave Obama a chance. He didn't keep many of them in the fold in 2012 or 2016. Some of them will probably come back in 2020 because they don't like Donald Trump personally, although that assumes that the Dems will nominate someone that they do like. 

B. People who didn't turn out for Hillary in 2016. As discussed above Hillary nearly matched Obama's national vote total from 2012, but that was because of higher turnout in non-competitive states. For example, her combined vote totals in CA and TX exceeded Obama's 2012 haul by 1.468 million. But her combined totals in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin was 698,000 less than Obama in 2012.  Some of those people switched over to Trump but more of them simply stayed home.  Whoever the Democratic nominees is, they will know that they must turn out marginal voters in those three states.

3. PROTEST GREENS (1 million voters)

Voters who voted Green in 2016 but not in 2012.

Jill Stein tripled her vote count between 2012 and 2016, from half a million votes to 1.5 million votes. Those million votes are most likely to come home to the Democratic party but it has to be acknowledged that a centrist like Biden will pick up fewer of them than Sanders or Warren will.

These are imprecise groups. There is some double counting, especially between the first two groups. But I think it's a useful matrix for categorizing the "lanes" of the 2020 Democratic Primary.  I give you our first attempt to rank the chance of each serious candidate to be the nominee, relative to others and divided by who they would most appeal to in the general election.

Tier	Protest Greens	Trump/Stayed Home	Soft Libertarian
First	Sanders	Buttiegieg	Biden
Second	Warren	Harris	Booker
Third		O'Rourke	Klobuchar
Fourth	Ryan	Castro	Gillibrand
Fifth		Inslee
Sixth		Hickenloper

Note: The Red Box is intentionally blank, because I think Ryan is less likely to be the nominee than O'Rourke or Klobuchar. For that matter, I think he's less likely than Castro or Gillibrand also. 

Here is the whole field, even the weirdos nobodies and proxy by grandchildren candidates, ranked from 1 to 22.

The Top Tier Candidates.

1. Bernie Sanders  

2. Joe Biden  

3. Pete Butigieg 

The Pack. (Someone from this group will break out of IA and NH to be a contender.)

4. Kamala Harris 

5. Corey Booker 

6. Elizabeth Warren 

7. Beto O'Rourke  

8. Amy Klobuchar 

9. Juan Castro 

Third Tier: Plausible But Flawed And/or Floundering.

10. Kristin Gillibrand 

11. Tim Ryan 

12. John Hickenlooper 

13.  Jay Inslee 

14. John Delaney.

15. Eric Swalwell 

16. Tulsi Gabbard

17. Seth Moulton

Fourth Tier: Long Shots.

18. Andrew Yang

19. Steve Bullock

20. Wayne Masson

21. Marianne Wiliamson

22. Mike Gravel

I debated leavin him off, because he's not really running. But he's indulging his grandchildren in letting them run a social media campaign in his name. What a country.

2020 Democratic Field, Take 3

I. THE SPIDERSTUMBLED BLOG POWER RANKINGS.

This section is just about me. These are my ranked preferences among the likely candidates.  If thier standing has changed since the first rankings, I put their number from the previous iteration of this list in parenthesis.  Bold indicates that the candidate has already announced that they are running.

Tip of the 40 ounce to Sherrod Brown, who decided to sit this race out and hope for a VP call.

Five That I Would be Enthused About:
1. Amy Klobuchar. 
2. Kamala Harris  
3. Beto O'Rourke 
The reaction to his launch on liberal social media was surprisingly negative. But he has talent and he will win find his feet and be a force.
4. Elizabeth Warren  
She has put forth the most specific and substantive policy ideas so far.
5. Chris Murphy
Seems less likely to run.

Ten That I Would Be Happy With:
6. Kristin Gillibrand 
Uninspiring so far, which is why I moved her down to the second tier of my personal choices.
7. Steve Bullock (8)
8. Joe Biden (9)
10. Mitch Landrieu
11. Tim Ryan
12. John Hickenlooper
13. Jay Inslee
14. Julian Castro (Unranked)

Four That Mean Something Went Wrong But Okay, Sure:
15.  Andrew Cuomo 
16. Terry McAuliffe 
17.  Corey Booker 
18. Pete Buttigieg 
He had a good cable TV roll out on CNN and raised 600K. I still think he's running solely to raise his profile, but it's worth acknowledging that he's already done that, a bit.

Four That Well, I Won't Vote For Trump, So Fingers Crossed.
19.  Bernie Sanders (21)
20.  Tom Steyer
21. The Field of Dumb Celebrities

One WHAT THE FUCK?
22. Tulsi Gabbard.  (Unranked)

II.  The 2020 Hourse Race.

The Top Tier Candidates.

1. Bernie Sanders  16%/60%

2. Joe Biden   14%/70%

3. Kamala Harris 14%/65%

4. Elizabeth Warren 11%/60%

5. Corey Booker 6%/50%

Second Tier: The Anti-Trumps

6. Beto O'Rourke  9%/70%

7. Amy Klobuchar 9%/70% To win, you have to run. That's why she leap frogged Beto.

Third Tier: Plausible But Flawd.

8. Kristin Gillibrand 3%/57%

9. Andrew Cuomo 1%/60%

10. Terry McCauliffe 1%/60%

11. Chris Murphy 1%/65%.

Fourth Tier: Long Shots.

If Mitch Landrieu, Steve Bullock, John Hickenlooper, Jay Inslee, Tim Ryan, John Delaney  or Eric Swaell somehow get through this crowded field, then they possess political skills of formidable depth and would be the favorite to win against Trump.  

If Buttigieg, Gabbard or Some Dumb Celebrity is the nominee, Trump will probably win.

The 2020 Democratic Nomination

The next presidential election is 96 weeks and two days. Democrats are currently favored to beat the incumbent president, who is very unpopular outside of his Republican base. Betting markets give the Democrats about a sixty percent chance of winning. There's just one tricky part left-they have to pick a candidate.

The Democratic field is going to be enormous. As many as 20 candidates will likely announce that their intention to run for the nomination. That process will probably start in a few weeks. I wanted to write a post about my feelings about the relative strengths and vulnerabilities of every plausible candidate.  I will make some predictions. all with the understanding that 1,000 unexpected things will happen between now and the Iowa caucus.

Before dissecting the individual candidates, I will state my own biases.

THE SPIDERSTUMBLED BLOG POWER RANKINGS.

This first section is just about me. These are my ranked preferences among the above-listed candidates. I will update this every so often as candidates either anounce their run or delcine to run. I have  broken them into informal tiers, although the lines are a little fluid between them.

Six That I Would be Enthused About:
1. Amy Klobuchar.
2. Beto O'Rourke
3. Kamala Harris
4. Elizabeth Warren
5. Chris Murphy
6. Kristin Gillibrand

Ten That I Would Be Happy With:
7. Steve Bullock
8. Joe Biden
9. Mitch Landrieu
10. Sherrod Brown
11. Michael Blomberg
12. Tim Ryan
13. John Hickenlooper
14. Jay Inslee
15. Eric Garcetti
16. Eric Holder

Four That Mean Something Went Wrong But Okay, Sure:
17.  Terry McAuliffe
18.  Andrew Cuomo
19.  Pete Buttigieg
20.  Corey Booker

Four That Well, I Won't Vote For Trump, So Fingers Crossed.
21.  Howard Schultz
22.  Bernie Sanders
23.  Tom Steyer
24. The Field of Dumb Celebrities

THE 2020 HORSE RACE

Prolouge: The Very Corrupt Elephant in the Room.

Donald Trump and almost every organization that he has ever been the head of are currently subject to a variety of criminal and civil investigations. I expect that at some point in 2019, Robert Mueller will conclude his investigation into Russian interference with the election. It's possible that Donald Trump will be impeached, but I would not bet on that outcome. It's also possible that Mueller's findings will be do damning that the Republican party decides they have to jettison him. They might succesfully talk him into not running for a second term if things are very bad but the man is nothing if not stubborn. I expect Donald Trump to be the 2020 Republican nominee because he is etremely shameless and very popular among Republican voters.

Prologue 2: The Very Conflicted Donkey in the Room.

I do not think Hillary will run again but you can't completely ignor her as a possible nominee, especially if none of the candidates below racks up a clear win in the primaries. It's easy to say that no one wants Hillary vs. Trump II, but Hillary and her family would love the opportunity. She just can't get it by running from the start. She needs a chaotic early primary season. I will reserve a 1% chance of her being the nominee.

The Top Tier Candidates.
Putting candidates into tiers is always a bit arbitrary but with a field of two dozen names, it helps to organize them in some way. My definition of a Top Tier candidate is someone with a plausible resume, significant national name recognition, and the ability to raise enough money to compete for the nomination.  I think five people fit this standard. I will list them in the order of likelihood to be the nominee.

1. Bernie Sanders.
Chance of Being the Nominee: 18% Chances of Beating Trump if Nominated: 60%.

He's never going to win over the instituational party while continuing to refuse to become a member of that party. But he is the only candidate in the field who ran last time and the only candidate in the field who ever came reasonably close to becoming the nominee. He has lot of infrastructure and good-will, especially on the left-wing of the party. His biggest weaknesses are age (79 on election day 2020), his unwillingness to join the very organization that he seeks to lead and his poor showing with black voters in 2020.  The grime that accumulates on anyone from being in the national game for a long time will hurt him this time around. A lot of party activists do not like him. Also worth noting that he doesn't know a god damn thing about foreign policy despite having already made a serious run at this office. That should be disqualifying, but his advantages are too significant to ignore. If he finds away to get some votes from black voters, he could win this nomination.

2. Joe Biden
Chance of Being the Nominee: 14% Chances of Beating Trump if Nominated: 70%.

Joe Biden was born to be Vice-President of the United States. He knew how to work Capitol Hill and he knew how to keep the base energized. His experience was invaluable to Barack Obama and the party loves him for it. But he's almost as old as Bernie. (Seventy-seven on election day, 78 on Inauguration Day, if elected.) He also has a long record of votes that will not endear him to the activist base. He used to be called the Senator from MBNA, and was the prinicpal force behind some truly terrible changes to the bankruptcy code in 2005. That may seem like a small thing, but it is a fact that Elizabeth Warren will make sure everyone knows.

3. Kamala Harris
Chance of Being the Nominee: 13% Chances of Beating Trump if Nominated: 65%.

She is the most viable black candidate. She's only been in the senate for two years, but prior to that she held a job bigger than most governships-Attorney General of California. The primary knock against her is that she was a prosecutor for a long time and that means she's got a less than stellar record on civil liberties and drug policy. But she ran a very strong campaign in 2016, beating another Democrat in all but four of California's 58 counties. As a senator,  she has done pretty well in the spotlight of national TV appearances and the Kavanaugh hearings. Her legislative record is very light, but that might not be a negative for her.  She has great appeal to a lot of Democrats, who would love nothing more than for Trump to be beaten by a woman of color. She has to come up with a message that resonates, but there's little reason to think she won't do that. And she has great access to fundraising from Californians.

4. Elizabeth Warren
Chance of Being the Nominee: 10% Chances of Beating Trump if Nominated: 55%.

This is a tough one for me. I like and admire Senator Warren very much. I think she would be a good president and she's right exactly where I want a president to be on the idealogical spectrum. She understands how our economy works better than any presidential candidate in recent memory. Most importantly, she can translate that knowledge into explanations of how the macro economy affects average pocketbooks.

But her political instincts are not great. Her first election in 2012 was closer than it should have been in a deep blue state with Barack Obama at the top of the ticket. (Her recent re-election was a much stronger result, winning by 24.)  And there's the dumbest issue of all, her Native American ancestry and the accusation that she has benefitted professionally by over stating them. I think the evidence for this is rather light. All of her employers deny that her negligible native ancestry played any part in their decision to hire her. But it's the perfect issue for Trump to run on. It's stupid and he does not care about the facts at hand. Worse yet, Senator Warren has taken the bait from him at every step of the way. A couple months ago she promoted the fact that DNA testing proved she does in fact have at least one Native American ancestory. That person died before she was ever born and tribal leaders were quick to dispel the idea that it has any bearing on her status. Donald Trump of course took the news to double down on his ridiculous racist slurs against her.

But the worst part of this stupid story is that it's precisely the kind of thing that people hate politicians to do. It feels phoney, even if here actions were sincere and ultimately backed up by actual science. Her biggest weakness is that no one will want the 2020 election to be about something this stupd. I can almost hear the chance of "But her 23andMe" now.  That's dumb and it shouldn't rule her out as a candidate, but we have to face the fact that it will rub those WI/MI/PA voters the wrong way.

5. Corey Booker
Chance of Being the Nominee: 6% Chances of Beating Trump if Nominated: 45%.

I will be brief. He is too corporate for the base and too phoney for the general.  There are many people who love him deeply, but he is Wall Street's favorite senator for a good reason. It will be very easy for Trump to portray him as an effete liberal who oh by the way doesn't have a wife. That does not play well.  I keep him in the top tier because he will raise gobs of money, command a lot of TV cameras and he has a natural advantage with black primary voters.  He should survive the early rounds but I don't think he will win over the left wing of the party.

The Second Tier: The Anti-Trumps.

Americans tend to react to a president by choosing someone who is fundamentally different than his predecessor. In the Simpsons television universe, President Donald Trump is followed by President Lisa Simpson. I think Lisa is an apt analogy for what the Democrats need. We have a doozy of an asshole in the White House now. His rank stupidity oozes from every pore of his fatuous head, rivaled only by his intense lack of security. He is bereft of manners and decency. He is constantly desparate for affirmaton of his greatness. These traits had some quirky appeal when he was an upstart candidate.  As President, they grate, even on people who should be his fans.  The Democrats should remember that when choosing a nominee.

6. Beto O'Rourke.
Chance of Being the Nominee: 10% Chances of Beating Trump if Nominated: 70%.

The Greek-American actor Andreas Voutsinas once told Mel Brooks, "Or you got it or you ain't." He was talking about talent. It's important. Beto has it. People like him because he's handsome and he's extremely comfortable in his own skin-the way you can only be comfotable if you know that you're people like you. That confidence creates the greatest gift of all for a politician, it eliminates the need to constatnly sound like you're full of shit.

Beto can take unpopular stances and make them sound principled in a way that even people who disagree with him respect him for it. That is why he made a race of it against Ted Cruz in Texas. He lost by two and a half points to an incumbent senator with a national fundraising machine while the Democratic candidate for governor got crushed by 13.

He will raise a lot of money. He will inspire people to knock on doors for him. He will suprise everyone with his grasp of policy at the early debates.  He is the real deal.

Of course he has weaknesses. His resume is thin and he's never held a statewide office. He also has a voting record that is more centrist than the mood of the party. But if he racks up some early wins, it's going to become obvious that he can beat Donald Trump like a drum. That can get him the nomination.

7. Amy Klobuchar
Chance of Being the Nominee: 9% Chances of Beating Trump if Nominated: 75%.

In a just world, Donald Trump gets his ask kicked on November 3, 2020 by a woman. Amy Klobuchar is better situated to deliver that ass kicking than anyone else on this list. She is respected and liked by her colleagues she has a long record of public service with no glaring problems for either the nomination or the general election. She also does well among rural voters in a midwestern state.

Just as Beto's youth and vigor are a natual conter-balance to Trump's decript anger, Senator Klobuchar is another kind of opposite to the incumbent. She is urbane, polite and level-headed. She speaks warmly and graciously. She is a mother and an accomplished lawyer. I imagine that her idea of a fun weekend while President would be to go to Camp David with her husband to play scrabble and maybe drink some wine while reading a book. Isn't it nice to think of a president doing that on her days off?

She too will have some challenges. She was a prosecutor and that might hurt her in the primaries. (Although it would surely help her in the general, when Trump will be running as the candidate of Law & Order, now matter how many of his close advisors from 2016 are in prison.)  She also doesn't have an obvious connection to black or Latin voters.  But she is smart and she is popular and a serious politician. I think her best campaign slogan would be "Amy Klobuchar, When I'm President You Will Go Entire Weeks Without Even Thinking About Me."

8. Sherrod Brown
Chance of Being the Nominee: 8% Chances of Beating Trump if Nominated: 70%.

Sherrod Brown's appeal is simple-he is the labor candidate. He can win over the Obama/Trump voters by saying with a straight face that he is on the side of American workers, now and always.  He is too protectionist for my liking, but that will be an asset when courting the endorsements of labor unions and it will deny Donald Trump one of hig primary talking points.

On the other hand, Protectionism is stupid and is already starting to hurt American farmers and workers. By 2020, this could be a real liability.

The real issue for and against Brown is his home state of Ohio. He is the only Democrat that would be favored to carry that state, which Trump won by nine points in 2016. Brown was just re-elected there by seven points, even as a Democrat was losing the open governor's mansion race by four. That's a sign of political strength. It also spells our an unfortuante dowside. If Brown is elected president, that new Republican governor of Ohio will get to pick his replacement. So a vote for Brown is also a vote for one fewer Dem in the senate.

The Third Tiers-Plausible But Flawed.

9. Michael Bloomberg
Chance of Being the Nominee: 3% Chances of Beating Trump if Nominated: 55%.

Michael Bloomberg is another version of the Anti-Trump model. He is an actual billionaire with 100% verifiable success in businesss. He is the real deal. He is also a genunie philanthropist and someone who put in the time holding a difficult and important elected position before running for president.  He was, on balance, a good mayor. He believes in science and his focus on climate change is laudable.

His record makes it tough for him to get through the primary. He was, after all, elected mayor as a Republican. He stood by Bush-Cheney through the 2004 re-election. And he is the face of stop and frisk. I think that kills his chances, or should. The only reason I think he has any chance of winning is that he has unlimited money and will spend it, either to win or to advance the ideas and causes that matter most to him.

His general election prospects are very difficult to handicap. He is old, Jewish and presently unmarried. He's also very much associated with the cause of gun control. That will hurt him in some states that the Democrats need to win.

10. Kristin Gillibrand
Chance of Being the Nominee: 3% Chances of Beating Trump if Nominated: 55%.

She is smart and dilligent and wants the job. She is qualified and likeable. She's also done some good work on issues like sexual harassment that will give her a base to build from. But I don't see her as a breakout star.

11. Eric Holder
Chance of Being the Nominee: 1% Chances of Beating Trump if Nominated: 60%.

He's never run for political office. That will hurt him more than you think. I also don't think he's particularly inspiring.

12. Andrew Cuomo
Chance of Being the Nominee: 1% Chances of Beating Trump if Nominated: 55%.

The base hats him but everytime we write him off, he crushes the challenger before him. Maybe he has a strategy to get through this field, but I don't see it happening.

13. Terry McCauliffe
Chance of Being the Nominee: 1% Chances of Beating Trump if Nominated: 60%.

He knows how to raise money, so I don't want to write him off. He also did a pretty good job during his four years as governor of Virginia. But he is dripping in Clintonism and I don't think that will play well during either phase of the 2020 election.  He just feels corrupt in ways that are likely to give Trump and Fox News plenty of fodder.

14. Chris Murphy
Chance of Being the Nominee: 1% Chances of Beating Trump if Nominated: 60%.

Perfectly plausible. Has a good knack for social media and might run to grow his stature but I don't think anyone is clamoring for him.

The 4th Tier-Long Shots.
These are all candidates who will at least explore the idea of running. Some of them might believe they can be the nominee but that will take a significant miracle. Mosts of them are probably doing a Mike Huckabee-running to get some exposure that they can parlay into better media gigs or maybe a cabinet position.

All of these candidates have less than a 1% chance of being the nominee, so I'll only list their chance of beating Trump in the general.

15. Eric Garcetti.
He would be a reasonably strong candidate (probably about 60 percent to win) but I don't see him wearing down all the people above him.

16. Mitch Landrieu
Another reasonable general election candidate. He has an interesting narrative and obvious talent but he probably won't clear the field.  I'll say 65 percent chance of winning, if nominated.

16. Steve Bullock
He would be a strong candidate in the general but it would take a pretty significant collapse of the major candidates for him to even get a foot in the door of the early states. 

17. John Hickenloper.
John Hickenloper was the governor of Colorado. He has a certain cache with the marijuana reform movement. But I don't think we have to worry about The Hickenloper Era becoming a thing. He's probably another 65 percent chance to win.

18. Jay Inslee
Inslee is a former governor of Washington and a boring, competent generic Dem. I give him the standard 60 percent chance of beating Trump.

19. Tim Ryan
Ryan is a representative from Northeast Ohio (Youngstown/Akron). Being from Ohio elevates him to 65 percent chance of winning, although unlike Brown he doesn't hold office state wide so it's hard to say for sure that he would run well in the southern part of the state, where Trump and Trumpism are quite popular.

20. Rep. John Delaney
I guess he wants to be on MSNBC more. Seems a bit lacking in gravitas so I'll downgrade him to 55 percent in the general.

Fifth Tier Novelty Candidates. None of these people can win or even be nominated. But they have money to burn and/or ambition to spare.

21. Howard Schultz  He's willing to spend his Starbucks money on an ego boost. He will be exposed as a lightweight very early on.

22. Tom Steyer He'll probably make some noise by being a hard-liner on impeachment and making dumb emotional appeals. Fuck this guy.

23. Pete Buttigieg Mayor of the 4th largest city in Indiana. Like everyone who spends time in South Bend, he has an inflated sense of his own self-worth.

24. Some Dumb Celebrity.  There has to be a whole other list of 25 B and C list celebrities who are being told that they could run for president on a platfrom of being more successful entertainers than the incumbent. I hope none of them take the bait, but I have a sinking suspsicion that at least one of them will. After all, how hard can it be?

Midterms in Review

 I went to bed on Election Day thinking that Donald Trump had a pretty good night. I knew that the Democrats had won back the House of Representatives, but that was the bare minimum for what they needed to accomplish. That majority looked somewhat modest. More importantly, they were on track to lose four senate seats that they were defending without flipping any Republican seats. When I went to bed, there was even a chance that Scott Walker migth hang on for a third term as governor of Wisconsin.

 When morning came, I learned that Walker was out and that the Democrats had booted Dean Heller out of his senate seat from Nevada. And there was suddenly more than a little doubt about the outcomes in both Arizona and Florida. In the five days since then, it seems almost certain that the Arizona senate seat will be won by the Democrats. And Florida is not done counting yet, although I suspect that Bill Nelson will come up short. For purposes of this post, we'll assume that Democrats lost a net of two seats.

The other piece of happy news since Tuesday has been the steady drip of house races going blue. There are still 13 seats that have not been called by news outlets. Nate Silver estimates that ten of those 13 seats will wind up in the Democratic column. That will mean a net gain of 38 House seats.

First, A Word About Me.

 My official prediction was that the Democrats would gain 32 seats in the house. That was slightly pessimistic. The real number will be closer to 40. That's an impressive number by an reasonable measure. The Democratic majority will be about the same size that the Republican majority has been the last 2 years. It will be awhile before we have the final results but it appears that the Democrats have won most of the very close races, which means they put their resources in the right places in the right quanities. That is cause for optimism.

 My official senate prediction was a loss of one seat, but I broke that down into four categories of races.  The below passage is from the preidcitions post, which are in the maroon background. I've also added post-elections commentary in ALL CAPS BOLD. (So you know I'm serious.)

A.  One Likely Loss. The Dems will lose North Dakota. CORRECT

B.  Two True Toss-ups. The Dems will split Missouri and Florida. CLOSE BUT NO CIGAR, UNLESS NELSON PICKS UP 12,000 VOTES IN THE RECOUNT.

C. Three Lean Democrats.  The Dems will take 2 out of 3 among Indiana, Arizona and Nevada. CORRECT

D. Long Shots  The Dems could lose Montana, but I don't think they will. They could put an upset in Tennessee but I think they will come about 3 points shy there. Texas is hard for me to judge because I so badly want Ted Cruz to lose. CORRECT, ALTHOUGH TENNESSE WAS NOT AS CLOSE AS I HOPED. BREDESEN LOST BY 11, NOT THREE.

I came pretty close to getting this exactly right. Whatever Nelson's margin of defeat winds up being will also be the difference between me and a perfect night in the upper house. (Yes, I'm aware my model built in some fudge factor by grouping races. The truth is that I overestimated the Dems in Indiana, Tennesse and Missouri more than I did in Florida, but hey results are what matters.)

I also predicted that the Democrats would gain eight governor's mansions but I didn't specify which ones. It looks like the final number will be seven. I did think Gillum and Abrahms each had a chance to win, so I guess we can put the difference there. (Full disclosure: I spent less than 90 seconds working on my Governor predictions.)

I'll gve my self an A- on the predictions. And shake my fist at the design of the Broward County ballot for keeping me from having a truly impressive night.

Report Card Time.

In my election preview I created a somewhat vague grading scheme for how to evaluate the Democrats performance on the night. (I reserved F Scenarios for failing to win either house. We can skip that, thankfully.)

D Scenarios.  If the Democrats win one house but underperform in the other, then they have done the bare minimum to stay relevant to government. The most likely D scenario is a gain of 25 seats, giving them a razor-thin margin in the House, but they lose several of their senate seats and don't pick up any GOP seats.  So about 221 in the house and 46 or 47 in the Senate. Awful, but not technically a complete failure.  WE WELL EXCEEDED THAT IN THE HOUSE, BUT WILL PROBALY END UP WITH THAT TALLY IN THE SENATE.

C Scenarios.  If the Dems win at least 30 seats and don't lose more than one senate seat (net), they will get a gentleman's C. (C+ if they do well in the governor's race.)  TECHNICALLY WE'RE IN C+ COUNTRY AS OF NOW, BUT I THINK I MAY HAVE PUT TOO MUCH VALUE ON THE SENATE FOR MY GRADING SYSTEM, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE TOUGH TERRAIN FOR DEMOCRATS. THIS NIGHT FEELS MUCH BETTER THAN A C+, EVEN WITH THE DISSAPOINTMENTS IN FLORIDA.

B Scenarios.  A lot of the advanced analytics types have the most likely outcome for the Dems being about +37 in the House and -1 in the senate.  I think that's a solid B. THIS IS ABOUT RIGHT, BUT THE GOVERNOR'S RACES WERE ALSO STRONG. 

A Scenarios.  So what makes a wave? The biggest recent was the 2010 Tea Party election when the Dems lost 63 seats. But they started that year with 256. The GOP only has 241 at the moment. So +48 would match that end result. I think anything over 40 would be a wave and it probably means picking up at least one senate seat.  So let's call this 235 in the House and a 50/50 Senate.  WE DIDN'T GET THERE BUT THE HOUSE CAME AWFULLY CLOSE.

A+ Scenario:  This is easy-the House by more than a handful of seats and the Senate. But to really earn the +, we'd have to see some really awful Republicans lose. It's not an A+night if Ted Cruz is re-elected. Beating Steve King or Dan Rohrbacher would be nice cherries on top too. Stace Abrams winning in Georgia would also be a profound outcome for the party  WELL, DANA ROHBACHER IS A NICE PLET TO PUT ON THE MANTLE.

I'm torn between giving them a B or a B+. For now I'll call it a B but I will run back here to upgrade if Nelson and/or Gillum winds up winning. And there is going to be a runoff race in Mississippi. Hopefully we'll make that competitive at least. It sure feels like our base is energized by the results.


What Does it Mean?

The Democrats will be able to pass all kinds of stuff in the house. But if they want any of that stuff to become law, they will need to reach agreement with the senate. And it's not just a matter of persuading four Republicans to join them. Mitch McConnell will control the senate and he alone will decide what gets put to a vote. I think that means a lot of gridlock.

But there are a handful of Republican senators who are vulnerable to losing in 2020.  Specifically Susan Collins (ME), Joni Ernst (IA) and Cory Gardner (CO) will all be in very close races. There will also be an election for the remainder of John McCain's term in Arizona. John Kyl has said he will not run in that race and he will probably resign in January, allowing Arizona to nominate a person who will run. Whoever is chosen, will have to worry about facing a close election in 2020.

Those Republicans will want to run on some accomplishments. They can put pressure on McConnel to let some things get done, especially if it means avoiding a government shut down. The senate is also close enough that there will be at least some very modest limits on who Trump can appoint to the senate. (But I'm not optimistic on this point. It's pretty easy to imagine Mitch getting 50 of his 53 member coalition to vote for just about anyone.)


What We Really Care About: 2020.
The map at the top of this post was put up by Nate Silver on Twitter the day after the elections. He tabulated the "popular" vote of every house race, by state. (This required an adjustment for Florida where votes in uncontested races do not get counted.) The result was a near replic of Obama's 2012 victory. (Republicans winning Ohio and the 2nd district of Maine, for a 324-214 Democratic win.)

That's certainly encouraging. And I think that's a possible outcome for 2020, although something would have to change for Iowa to flip back to blue, having gone for Trump by eight points last time. Trump's tariffs might just be disastrous enough to swin the race, but if that's the case, Democrats have probably sewn up the race in other places.

I think the biggest take-aways from Tuesday are this:
1. Trump is not imploding but he's also no invincible. The results in senate races correlated with Trump's current popularity. The Republican candidates in Indian, Tennesse and Missouri benefitted from his popularity. Those in Nevada and Arizona suffered. And Florida, as always, was a wash.

2. The next race will be close. Trump will start 2020 with the command of his party and a solid 200 electoral votes in his pocket. The race is going to be decided in about eight states.  A few analysts have identified two paths for the Democrats to win the White House back-a northern strategy of winning back Wisonsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan or a southern strategy of winning Florida and either North Carolia or Arizona.

I think for now we have to keep as many states in play as poosible. A geographic hybrid of PA and NC would require just one more state to flip. In 2016, we got complacent because of the "Blue Wall." I don't want us to think too narrowly in 2020 because we think there is "Red Wall" behind Trump. So let's keep an eye on any pink state in that map. (Yes, even Montana. Crazier things have happened, and John Tester might be on the ticket.)

3.  If the economy stays strong, Trump will probably be re-elected. One of the most remarkable things about the Democratic gains on Tuesday is that they happened despite low-unemployment and at least some glimmer of hope that wages are beginning to finally rise. If that growth in employment lasts another two years, then Trump will be in a strong position. He will have the support of the investor class and have much more credibility than he did two years ago.

I went to bed on election night before the race was officially called for Trump. I didn't want to experience that moment live. I went to bed with Hillary having a chance for an inside straight, if some western state flipped for her. That did not happen and I leanred the awful news at about seven AM on Wednesday. This year I went to bed fearing that Trump's coalition outperformed the polls. It didn't. But it had a stronger than expected showing in Florida and Georgia.

I expect 2020 to be another nail biter. Unless there is a war or massive scandal coming out of the Mueller probe, then both bases will be fired up for their side. Lots of people will go to bed before anything has been called. I will not. I'm going to see that one through. And I encourage you to begin to think about how you want that night to turn out and what you are going to do to bring about that result. My plan is to vote first thing in the morning, then drive to Wisconsin and take little old ladies to the polls for as long as I can, whereever the Democratic candidate needs me most. If I have to live with eight years of this clown show, I'm going to do so with a clear conscience as to my own efforts.

I will close with one last snipped from my predictions post. Because it needs to be drilled into everyone's head for the next 721 days:  I will never, ever trust Florida in an election