Thread by @davekarpf

Okay, so... I see five lessons from last night as the smoke begins to clear.

I'm still nervous about the state of the Democratic primary. But now I have EXCITING, NEW reasons to be nervous!
(1/x)

First: it turns out 2020 looks a lot like 2004 after all.

2004 has always been the backdrop to this race. That was the last time Dems faced an incumbent Republican who we HATED. It creates the "electability" demand that everyone has fretted so much about.
(2/x)

Electability is a bit of a paradox. We can't actually know which candidate is most electable. But, also, the thing that voters *genuinely care most about* is choosing a candidate who can beat Trump.

They care more about that than policy specifics or personal traits. (3/x)

And that's a structural dynamic of the 2020 race, just like it was in 2004. We fight more about policy or personality in 2008 or 2016, when we have an open race and no singular opponent uniting us against a status quo government. They're more salient topics in those years. (4/x)

And yes, I know, John Kerry lost in 2004. Noting that 2020 feels like 2004 doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

And like I said, I'm still *nervous.*

But it is what it is. Dem voters acted last night like in 2004. They weren't duped by a billionaire or controlled by the media.

Dem voters were looking for a candidate who they believed could represent the party and beat Trump. They have become convinced (in only the past ~5 days) that Biden is that candidate. And they swarmed to him!

Yikes! That escalated quickly. Let's pause to evaluate.
(6/x)

Going into last night, the Sanders campaign had two paths to the nomination. There was a good path and a bad path. The bad path just evaporated. The good one is looking less likely.
(7/x)

The bad path had Sanders winning a huge plurality of delegates without demonstrating the ability to win more than 30-40% of the vote in any primary.

It was *very possible* that Sanders could have won 90% of California's delegates with, like 32% of the vote. (8/x)

That's a bad way to win. It's a recipe for party in-fighting. But it could easily have happened, simply b/c there were 7 viable candidates + a 15% threshold for earning delegates.

That didn't happen. If he becomes the nominee, he'll do so by building a majority coalition. Good.

The trouble for Sanders is that his *good* path for the nomination also looks much rockier now.

Sanders's candidacy is premised on transforming the electorate, bringing in a huge wave of new young and working class voters. That hasn't materialized yet.
(10/x)

If he can't bring in a big wave of new voters in the primaries, then it's going to be VERY hard to convince democratic voters that he can win in November.

Sanders's promise is that he'll expand the electorate. But he hasn't. That promise looks suspect today.
(11/x)

That said, we should all maybe pause for a beat before crowning Joe Biden the nominee.

Biden has not campaigned well. Maybe that will change now. Maybe he'll be charming-folksy-Joe who returns us to saner times and understands your pain.

But maybe not.
(12/x)

There's a lot in Biden's record that can cause him trouble. When he was challenged on this in early debates, he stumbled hard.

And yeah, I also worry that the years are catching up with him. Can he manage a massive campaign from now through November?
(13/x)

(I also REALLY worry about how he would govern. I think he's a replacement-level President when we need a serious reformer. But I'm gonna leave that for another tweetstorm. Even I'm getting a bit tired of me typing.)
(14/x)

I'll be more comfortable with Biden as a general election candidate once I've seen how he performs as the presumptive nominee for, like, a MONTH.

It's important that the primary campaign not be treated as essentially over. We still don't know if Biden is fit for office.
(15/x)

So that's why (preps for incoming rage-tweets) I hope that Warren doesn't drop out of the race this week.

She should reduce her staff and her advertising. She should focus on earned media, and kick ass at the next couple debates. But she shouldn't drop out.
(16/x)

Last night showed that the majority of democratic voters are not prepared to support Bernie. They flocked to Biden as the "safe" candidate once it was clear that's where everyone else was flocking.

We might face Buyer's Remorse in a week or two. There has to be a third option.

That means Warren's path is incredibly narrow. She's there to force Biden or Bernie to EARN a majority of votes in the final two thirds of the primaries. And she's there as a reasonable alternative if they both fail to do so.
(18/x)

It would mean her path to the nomination is one where no candidate has a majority or strong plurality of votes, and she doesn't have the most votes, but where she wins the last dozen primaries handily and becomes the late (relative) consensus pick.
(19/x)

That *probably won't work.* It's like a 2% chance.

She would only become the nominee if Biden turns out to be a trainwreck and Bernie turns out to not expand the electorate while not uniting the existing party base.

It's a "break glass in case of emergency" strategy.
(20/x)

But it's a better strategy than "drop-out, endorse-Bernie."

Warren voters aren't going to flock to Bernie en masse. Warren voters care about electability, and doubt he can expand the electorate in the way he would HAVE to. They'll divide between Biden and Sanders.
(21/x)

We still have two thirds of the primary elections left. That's a lot of time. It's enough time for Biden to prove he can run a good campaign. It's enough time for Bernie to prove he can expand the electorate or unite the party. But...
(22/x)

...It's also enough time for them both to falter in a thousand different ways.

Warren hasn't gotten any traction. But that isn't because of a fatal flaw in her campaign.

It's worth having her on stage in the next debate, pushing both frontrunners to earn the nomination.
(fin)