Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.

  1. Charles Bakker's avatar

    I want to go on record as noting that I think the term “artificial intelligence” is a misnomer. “Intelligence,” is…

  2. Greg's avatar

    The problem is the level of simplistic anthropomorphism in these discussions even from people that should know better. Personally I…

  3. Mark's avatar
  4. Mark's avatar
  5. Mathieu Rees's avatar

    I think that “existential risk” is less helpful of a category than “catastrophic risk”. For those who agree, the question…

  6. s.wallerstein's avatar
  7. David Wallace's avatar

The Democratic nominee for 2020

Brian Leiter

So there were over 800 votes in the poll since yesterday, although some suspicious voting for Gabbard/Bloomberg at one interval, so I'm going to list the top six, since Sherrod Brown was at times in the top five:

1. Bernie Sanders  (Condorcet winner: wins contests with all other choices)
2. Elizabeth Warren  loses to Bernie Sanders by 411–284
3. Amy Klobuchar  loses to Bernie Sanders by 406–322, loses to Elizabeth Warren by 452–265
4. Tulsi Gabbard  loses to Bernie Sanders by 460–230, loses to Amy Klobuchar by 320–240
5. Kamala Harris  loses to Bernie Sanders by 453–231, loses to Tulsi Gabbard by 314–279
6. Sherrod Brown  loses to Bernie Sanders by 484–136, loses to Kamala Harris by 271–219

Given the left-leaning tenor of this blog, and many of the readers, the only real surprise here, to me, is Klobuchar.  But comments are open, I'm happy to hear from readers about their choices, whether in the top six or not.  My own preference would be for Sanders or Warren, who have an actual social-democratic policy agenda.   Brown is also good on that score, and in some ways, Gabbard, although she has a lot of odd baggage related to her religiously-inspired bigotry in the past.  Please submit your comments only once, they may take awhile to appear.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

41 responses to “The Democratic nominee for 2020”

  1. Will Shetterly

    Klobuchar was also a surprise to me. She's from my state, so I'm a bit more aware of her than I wish I was. She's the candidate for people who wish they could vote for a moderate Republican.

    Reply
  2. Daniel Kaufman

    As I am a liberal, not a democratic socialist or progressive, I put Klobuchar high on the list and ranked the more left-leaning candidates towards the bottom. I looked at Brian's political affiliation poll, but perhaps he has more liberal/centrist readers than that poll indicated.

    Reply
  3. Richard Lewis

    Klobuchar being high on the list doesn't surprise me too much. I suspect the reason I put her in 3rd or 4th is similar to others on here: she seems to be an authentically 'boring' centrist candidate with a bit of common sense and therefore very different from the likes of Harris, O'Rourke and Booker who are actively dissembling virtue signalling types, who in office would probably heighten identity politics divisions while courting Wall Street and the Empire. Klobuchar won't scare Wall Street or the Military Industrial Complex, but she also won't bring that 'aura' of social justice virtue, which serves to effectively disguise real class interests.

    Reply
  4. Jim Holt

    Denying Trump a second term is the prime imperative. As things stand now, Biden has the best chance of doing that. (He would be particularly strong in swing states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Wisconsin.) Also, he was an extremely effective vice president during Obama's two terms, amassing considerable executive experience. He has good relations with Congress, and journalists like him (not least because he does not speak the usual langue de bois). His "negatives" are known and finite. And he might "grandfather in" a promising younger Democrat as his running-mate, possibly serving only one term. That would give the Democrats a strong and somewhat seasoned candidate for the White House in 2024.

    Reply
  5. Brian Leiter

    That's actually the most persuasive argument for Klobuchar I've heard. Interesting point.

    Reply
  6. Roger Albin

    Sanders will be ~80 years old if and when he took office. Biden ~78. They both seem to be vigorous, healthy individuals but electing any elderly individual to the Presidency is a substantial risk. I'm a physician and most of clinical practice is older Americans. Even apparently healthy individuals can decline quite suddenly and in the >80 age group, its not a question of if, its a question of when.
    The younger individual in this list with the most thoughtful approach to policy is definitely Senator Warren.

    Reply
  7. Andrew

    @Jim Holt,
    In this era of #MeToo and #BelieveAllWomen, Biden is finished. All Trump (or a Democratic challenger) needs to do is play the videos of Biden caressing the daughters or wives of men being sworn in, or blowing on their hair. Trump can nickname him as "Creepy Joe" or something worse, and the name will stick.

    See this critique of Biden from a liberal site:
    https://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/100590

    Reply
  8. Daniel Kaufman

    That article, better than anything, indicates the pathetic state of our politics today. We've all been transformed permanently into 14 year olds and our polity into an everlasting high school cafeteria.

    If this is what we are now, we deserve to be conquered by Huns.

    Reply
  9. Michel

    As a friendly northern neighbour, what I want for your country is to fix its healthcare problem once and for all, to lead the way on mitigating the effects of climate change and transitioning to a new economy, to have a long, hard look at the influence of the monied class, and to substantially reform its criminal justice system. To my mind, the current candidates most likely to make headway on those goals are Sanders and Warren. (And that's all I'm hoping for: headway. Four years is enough time to change the conversation and get the ball rolling, but it's obviously not enough time to do all the necessary work.) Harris could have a shot if she would just stop doubling down on her prosecutorial career and pretending that she was some kind of "progressive".

    If the Democratic Party wants to win this presidential election, then I think its best chance is to have Sanders somewhere on the ticket. Winning means running candidates that people will show up for, and I think that Sanders is far and away the best candidate by that measure.

    It's become abundantly clear to me over the last decade or two that the so-called "independent" vote is a Republican vote, and that the Democratic Party just doesn't win over moderate Republicans, who vote for the party every time. Chasing those votes is a waste of time, and will only push the youth vote further out of reach. It also fits into what's becoming a losing holding pattern: when negotiating, tack to the right (rather than pushing hard to the left, and compromising somewhere short of those goals) to look responsible and win votes. Besides which, the Democrats recently tried the "run a centrist" approach, and it was a colossal failure. Just try something different for once; it worked out really well (for the party) in 2008.

    Reply
  10. s. wallerstein

    I picked Elizabeth Warren for my first choice and then Sanders as my second choice for the reasons Roger Albin mentions above.

    Sanders is my favorite on strictly political grounds, but at 80 he will be just too old. Being president is an incredibly stressful job: we can all imagine crisis situations in which the president cannot sleep for more than an hour each night for days on end, etc., and at age 80 no one has the stamina that they have at age 50 or 60. Surgeons retire from doing surgery well before age 80 (although they continue practicing medicine). I'm 72 myself and I just don't have the energy that I had 20 years ago or even 5 years ago.

    I believe that Sanders can continue making a great contribution to politics from the Senate and after all, a senate is in etymological terms an assembly of old people. At age 80 one can have a great deal of wisdom and learned experience to contribute, but I don't see someone so old as being up to being president of a super-power.

    Reply
  11. Michel

    Oops, that was meant to be a general comment, not a reply to Dan Kaufman. My apologies!

    Reply
  12. Vikram

    I'm surprised Kirsten Gillibrand isn't in the top 5, given her progressive voting record in the Senate. It is true that she was part of the Blue Dog Coalition during her tenure in the House, so her more conservative political stance then may have something to do with people's ambivalence towards her.

    Reply
  13. Socialist

    If you’re a liberal, you should support the Sanders left on pragmatic grounds. The democrats have to negotiate with the far-right Republicans, so unless they begin from the far left, you’re unlikely to end up with anything remotely liberal.

    Reply
  14. David Wallace

    I'd have thought that the succinct case for Klobuchar is that she won senate elections in 2006/2012/2018 by 20 points/35 points/24 points, in a state which went for Hilary Clinton by only 1.5 points in 2016 and is demographically and culturally quite similar to the likely key battlegrounds of the 2020 election.

    Reply
  15. Fritz

    I think the argument for Klobuchar is really simple. Harris and Warren are at least plausibly (if not outright) unelectable. Too far left, from the wrong states, etc. Biden and Sanders are venerable white males—too heavy a lift in the identity politics of the left. Klobuchlar is from a rust belt state; the electoral college math on that is staggering. She’d destroy Trump—if she doesn’t mess up—and is probably the most viable candidate. If there was any surprise on the poll, it’s because people were voting pragmatically; she might not be anyone’s first choice in isolation, but she has the best chance of winning (in my opinion). Also, anyone super far left of her will trigger a third-party candidate who might ensure Trump’s reelection.

    Reply
  16. No Sanders Fan!

    Personally I despise Sanders. He's a self-absorbed blowhard whose "policies" are mostly empty gestures. I ranked him very far down and would only vote for him if he were the last "democrat" standing. Personally, I wish he would shut up and pass the baton to somebody less problematic. As to placing myself on the political spectrum, I wouldn't call myself a democratic socialist, though I would call myself a social democrat. But those labels don't really have much meaning or salience in the American political context. And I do think American politics is mostly dishonest blather on both the left and the right.

    Reply
  17. Brian Leiter

    I confess I find that an amazing take on Sanders from a professed social democrat. Rashomon strikes again!

    Reply
  18. Brian

    If you wish to criticize other commenters here who have posted under their own names, then you must also post under your own name. (And using fake names and e-mail addresses doesn't cut it.)

    Reply
  19. Matt

    Sharrod Brown would be, in principle, a find president, but if he's elected president, that means that President Brown will have that much harder time getting anything done, as his former senate seat will be filled by a Republican. So, unless there's reason to think that only he has a good chance to beat Trump, or that he is massively better than the others, that's a good reason to not vote for him in the primaries. I don't think we have any evidence at all to support those claims. (Contrast this with Biden. Every time he has run for national office on his own, he's been an utter failure, not managing to get any delegates in his former presidential runs. Is there good reason to think he'd do better now? No – but there's some to think he'd do worse. This, on top of his more conservative record, is more than enough reason to not support him.)

    I hope the people voting for Gabbard were either trolling or just ignorant of her actual record (among the more conservative for House democrats, bigoted in a number of clear cases, pro war, etc.), and not that they actually support her. Many low-information supporters of Sanders latched on to her because of the way she associated herself with him, but she should be a non-starter for anyone on the left. Thankfully, she's also a train-wreck, and so should go no where.

    Gillibrand has one of the most consistently "left" voting records in the Senate – more than Warren on some measures. She's smart and good at politics (much better at politics than Sanders, for example.) She deserves more support.

    Reply
  20. Tom Hurka

    The poll was ambiguous between two questions: who has the best policies? and who has the best chance of beating Trump? It's a comforting fantasy, but a fantasy, that the answers to the two questions are the same.

    Reply
  21. Brent Y.

    I agree. The main difference between Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders is area of expertise. Warren is a policy wonk who is good at insider baseball, Bernie can mobilize the masses. The latter is far more important. That is why Sanders' age is irrelevant. What matters is the mass movement that will be spurred by his candidacy, and the sea change in American political culture that will occur when he captures the presidency. Let's keep our eye on the ball.

    Reply
  22. ajkreider

    I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "the independent vote is a Republican vote". According to Gallup, 29% of the electorate identifies as Dem, 27% as Repub, and 42% as independent. Since Clinton won the popular vote by about 2%, the independents broke about evenly. And given the size of that group, that's where the action is.

    A run-to-the-left dem strategy is a sure-fire loser for the general. Maybe they can take comfort in a resounding, if hollow, primary victory.

    Reply
  23. Josh

    In what sense is Tulsi "pro war"? Her entire campaign is built around the issue of getting out of the Middle East, staying out of Venezuela, etc. Indeed, she is explicitly much better than Bernie on Venezuela.

    Reply
  24. V. Alan White

    Biden + (insert some contrast). That was Trump's campaign's strategy (I can't say it was his because he's clueless about anything but emotional appeals allied with money, which explains his entire life). Pence brought along evangelical appeal that was enough for the margins not covered by Russian interference. Biden could win with a Beto, or Klobuchar, or the like by pulling in Independents. Age is not so much as issue as perceived "energy", as Trump proved (despite the fact that he is really a lazy unliterate egoist).

    Reply
  25. Different Brian

    I have been out of the country for some time, so I have no sense of how the folk are thinking. Do people here think that someone like Bernie can beat Trump? I would have thought that the best bet for beating Trump is to run a centrist candidate who can win over the swing voters who find Trump distasteful. Those same swing voters might not vote for someone on the far end of America's political spectrum. I'm curious whether that take is completely wrong.

    Reply
  26. Chri Sistare

    Thank you. I am 67 years old and have found (already) the decline in abilities to be quite surprising.

    Reply
  27. Cat

    Democrats need to do whatever they can, even if it means breaking their own rules, to ensure that a pro-corporate centrist gets the nomination.

    If they do that, I am confident Trump will stand no chance.

    If there were a way to have some kind of test run general election where Trump is up against such a candidate, the result would leave no doubt in people's minds that what the public is really clamoring for right now, more than universal health care and college, more than paid family leave and a living wage, more than an end to mass surveillance and endless wars, and more than unchecked ruling class recklessness and greed, is a person who takes a moderate stance on these issues.

    Reply
  28. Brian Leiter

    I'm surprised by claims like this, which seem to have no basis in any evidence I'm aware of. The Democrats ran a pro-corporate centrist in 2016, and she lost. About 100,000 union voters flipped to Trump in three key Midwestern states: Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan. It's hard to believe these folks wouldn't have gone for Sanders, as some did in the primaries. African-American turnout was lower than in 2012, a crucial factor in Clinton's loss. What can we conclude from this? First, the Democrats need to have an African-American on the ticket somewhere. Second, the Democrats need to run a candidate who appeals to Midwestern working class voters. That could certainly be Sanders or Brown or maybe someone else.

    Reply
  29. Matt

    Josh -Gabbard is very much in favor of people bombing Muslims – her views on the so-called "war on terror" are as much pro-war views as any – even though they are based, it seems, in her Hindu nationalist anti-Muslim bigotry. She's not someone anyone on the left should support.

    Reply
  30. Ian

    Brian, I think you missed the joke.

    BL: Could be!

    Reply
  31. Joshua Harris

    Matt, okay, so vague neoliberal talking points about "religious bigotry" with no identifiable material consequences. Got it. I'll remember that next time I'm tempted to be a "low information voter"!

    Reply
  32. Untenured Ethicist

    If there is a serious primary challenge to Trump from someone who has held elected office and is not an extremist, I will register Republican and vote for the challenger.

    If not, when I vote in the Democratic primary, I will look at the candidates who still seem viable based on polling and previous primaries, and I will vote for the one I would most like to see in office. I would like to vote pragmatically, but I have no idea how to do so. After 2016, I feel almost completely unable to predict how my fellow citizens will vote.

    Of the relatively left wing candidates, my preference is for Warren. Though I appreciate the way Sanders' labeling himself "socialist" has moved the Overton window to the left, it is not accurate. He is not a socialist; he does not advocate public ownership of the means of production. Warren accurately describes herself as a capitalist who wants to fix the system. I prefer politicians who label their views accurately.

    Reply
  33. Devon Belcher

    Pelosi is 1.5 years older than Sanders and seems quite vigorous.

    Reply
  34. Devon Belcher

    Tom, I'm willing to be moved on Gillibrand, especially with what people have been saying lately.
    I must confess that her targeted FB ads really rubbed me the wrong way. She'd say "What do you think about X [where X is some generally liberal issue, like ending the war on drugs, or health care, yadda yadda] I want to hear from voters before I weight in!"
    Like, uh, maybe just take the lead instead of following? But maybe it was just a campaign donation thing.

    Reply
  35. Devon Belcher

    The so-called independents were largely voting out of hate for the centrists who have screwed them. I know many Trump voters who would have voted for Bernie or some genuinely populist Democrat. The center is a losing proposition.

    Reply
  36. abe

    Gillibrand was a conservative representative, joining the conservative Democratic Blue Dog coalition and receiving a 100% rating from the NRA. She did a lot of work as a corporate lawyer taking a leading role defending Phillip Morris, work that her firm did not require her to do. When she became Senator, she shed the conservative trappings, adjusting her views to fit her new constituency. Who knows what she'll do if she were to become President and what she'll regard as her constituency then.

    Reply
  37. Not A Sanders Fan

    "When Bernie Sanders launched his 2020 presidential bid this week, a Vermont Public Radio interviewer asked him how his candidacy fit into a moment when the Democratic Party is looking more diverse than ever. Sanders responded, “We have got to look at candidates, you know, not by the color of their skin, not by their sexual orientation or their gender and not by their age. We have got to move towards a nondiscriminatory society.”"

    Nice sentiment, but you his real reason for saying this is that it is only if you look past issues of race, gender, sexual orientation, age, that he become a plausible candidate. It would have been much more honest of him to say, "If I am to be a viable candidate, we had better look past race, gender, sexual orientation, and age." And he probably should have added something about looking past "party membership" too, while he was at it.

    Self-absorbed much, Bernie?

    Reply
  38. Brian Leiter

    I'm wondering whether this is another parody comment, or whether it is meant seriously? Having made a mistake once, I'll leave this to others.

    Reply
  39. M.

    You support the same Bernie Sander who won't call Maduro what he is: a dictator? The hard left is as disappointing as the hard right.

    BL: That's the one! Grow up anonymous baby. Maduro is not a dictator, even if he's a bad man and an authoritarian, just like Trump! Learn something about the record of U.S. involvement in Latin America.

    Reply
  40. D. Ross

    It is tough for a senator or congressman to beat a sitting incumbent, which is why it hasn't happened in a very long time. This describes too many of the declared Democratic candidates. I'm hoping a governor will throw his or her hat in the ring: Tom Wolfe would be excellent (but sadly I doubt he'll run), Hickenlooper is apparently close to a decision.

    Reply
  41. s. wallerstein

    Maduro is not a dictator. He is corrupt and incompetent.

    Any dictator worth the name would have had Guaido murdered or jailed weeks ago. What kind of dictator allows a self-proclaimed alternative president to parade around in the country holding rallies and giving press conferences? What kind of dictator allows a man who is an agent of a foreign enemy (Guaido being an agent of the U.S.) to challenge his authority without killing him, jailing him or at least throwing him out of the country on the spot?

    —–
    KEYWORDS:
    Primary Blog

    Reply

Designed with WordPress