Today, many Buttigieg and Klobuchar voters will reluctantly pull the lever for Biden, thinking it's the only reasonable choice for "moderation" and "electability." They will be wrong, on both counts.
I should preface what I'm about to say by acknowledging 1) it will prob make only a marginal difference who the Dems actually nominate so long as they coalesce behind that person and 2) American politics is extremely unpredictable!
But still, IMO, you can't avoid gaming out electability when you are facing the constitutional - and environmental - emergency that is the Trump administration. And while "electability" often cloaks discrimination, it doesn't have to.
I think electability favors Warren - def over Biden, prob over Sanders. Unfortunately she hasn't played up her strengths on this point in an effort to compete with Sanders for the left. Here's my thinking...
As in 2016, Trump will define this race along the axis of identity and race. I am skeptical that countering that with an appeal to our better angels, a la Biden, is going to work in the states that will decide the election.
You need a candidate who change the subject, so white voters go to the booth thinking economics, not race (or a complex mashup of econ+race). That's Sanders, Warren, and in a different and less effective way - the "I built a real business and you are a con" way - Bloomberg.
Warren definitely changes the subject to economics. She does so using a populist language that has a strong chance of winning over noncollege whites in battleground states. But two other groups obv also matter in this election...
Minorities and suburban women. So far, Sanders is much stronger with the former group than Warren. But that could change if Warren were to change her pitch to electability - in a sense, to appeal more to suburban moderates.
Why? B/c older black voters care a LOT about electability. bit.ly/2x6YpTn They are justly skeptical of huge promises. nyti.ms/2PILb5v And many are on the conservative wing of the Dem Party. 53eig.ht/2PIvJGu
I know less about Latino voters (would love to be educated), but my guess is that Sanders' strength there is in part a function of that group's large under-30 cohort.
My guess is also that Trump himself ensures strong Latino turnout for whoever Dems nominate. bit.ly/3cwftT8 And in a strong African-American or Latino running mate, and I think you can feel good about Warren turning out minorities.
Finally, why can Warren reach out to suburban moderates more effectively than Sanders - or Biden? Because she wants "big structural change" in the name of a better capitalism. She believes in markets and can talk that game. She used to be a Republican! bit.ly/2VN9zXP
She threads a needle no other candidate does. She has a populist's rage against self-perpetuating privilege and the ambition to tear it out at the root. But the garden she wants to grow is still a thoroughly liberal, market-driven one.
At the margins, I think that makes her a stronger candidate to rally the groups who will decide battlegrounds - minorities, suburban women, and noncollege whites. She just needs to make that argument herself.
Important @ryangrim @rmc031 piece makes the case that Warren staying in does Bernie more good than harm. theintercept.com/2020/03/03/war…
