If you think there is a better choice here’s your place to speculate. Names with some pros and cons would be nice.
4 Likes
Gavin Newsom. Charismatic and organized. He could take over a national campaign today.
2 Likes
Apparently Kamela Harris is the only alternative who could access the full $212m currently in the bank for the Biden campaign.
tl;dr: Kamela Harris, Gavin Newsom (CA gov), JB Pritzker (IL gov), Grechen Whitmer (MI gov), Sherrod Brown (OH senator), Dean Phillips.
The last two seem like long shots.
First choice…Eric Garcetti, currently ambassador to India and former mayor of los angeles…https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Garcetti
Born in 1971, not a Boomer. Great bona fides for international policy ( perhaps the only arena of government where the POTUS in charge.) effective mayor, familiar with the limits of a chief executive.
Gretchen Whitmore would be great, but she is too self aware and intelligent to volunteer for a position where you age 7years for each year in office and end up being vilified by the voters for your troubles. Let’s face it, it’s a terrible job.
Good luck with replacing Biden with someone other than Kamala Harris and getting a high black turnout in the election.
1 Like
What prevents the Biden campaign from spending money on another candidate? It might be organizationally stuck there, but that seems like a problem that can be fixed.
Maybe RFKJ at this point. Why choose between old and crazy when you can have both?
1 Like
Campaign finance law. Funds that the Biden campaign has raised specifically for the general election (as opposed to general party funds, PAC funds, etc.), after repaying campaign expenses, has to be refunded to the contributors.
That looks to be almost half the funds currently in play for the Dems.
1 Like
I was thinking either RFK Jr or Nikki Haley could be hail Mary nominees at this point.
If the Dems do change horses at this point, I think Harris is more likely to be tapped due to the financial considerations.
I do think, however, that Newsom or Whitmer might have a better shot than Harris at defeating Trump, with Newsom being a better strategic pick rather than having a greater risk of losing the governorship of Michigan.
FWIW, here’s Newsom being interviewed on MSNBC last night, spinning for Biden: 'You don't turn your back!': Newsom defiantly pushes back on calls for Biden to step down
1 Like
It’s got to be someone that isn’t instantly polarizing - with ~4 months to the election, you don’t want to spend nearly all of it trying to solidify the base - but at the same time you’re not trying to cater to the ~40% of the electorate who’s going to vote for Trump no matter what.
That’s why not Pritzker, even if I think watching him sling mud with Trump in a debate might be entertaining. He’s not a terrible governor, but it’s Illinois so it’s a low bar to trip over - meaning, he’s not a good one either. And, with some of the progressive ideas shoved through Illinois recently I think it drives a wedge in the independents to the point they second-guess.
1 Like
Can a Newsom/Harris ticket spend the money?
I was wondering about that myself.
Couldn’t you just spend the money anti Trump rather than pro new person? Regardless it’s very much a sunk cost.
If I were donor, I would be sitting on my money waiting for the Democrats to go with plan B. If they do nothing, I sit on my money. If they do something smart and put out a good alternative, I might throw in 2-3x what I was considering giving to Biden.
I might be a donor, I gave Pete some money in the primary last election. I would not give money to Biden, I might give some money to Harris if she takes over, and I might give more to a few others.
The point is, starting over from a $ perspective should not be a deciding factor.
2 Likes
I think the FEC (especially one reconfigured after a Trump victory) would look VERY unkindly on attempts to do end-runs around campaign finance law.
And they are both from CA.
one of them can “move” to Wyoming.
3 Likes
I believe one reason that Pritzker is a “viable candidate” is that he has the personal funds to pay for a run at the office. Which I have very little doubt that he would do just that if he thought he had the Party’s backing.
However, I’m not very impressed with him given how he handled COVID in IL.
1 Like