As we suggested in our last post, Bernie Sanders has been dealt a knock-out punch that his campaign may never recover from; his main opponent for the Democratic Party nomination, former Vice President Joe Biden, may now be able to coast to victory and Wall Street, faced with either a Trump or Biden White House, can breathe easy (as long as the Coronavirus is dealt with), because the markets will continue as normal. Both Trump and Biden have a demonstrated loyalty to America's business agenda.
Assuming the establishment really does want to oust Trump, however - assuming the social justice warriors would not rather be outside the White House gates, rallying the masses and lobbying critique, especially amidst the Coronavirus - the question is: how can the Democrats defeat Trump?
Because politics are really nothing but a demographic headcount, the answer probably lies in whether Biden selects the "right" Vice President. According to a report by the Washington Examiner, the following candidates are in the running (odds of being selected in parenthesis):
The article suggests Harris has the greatest chance to become Biden's Vice President. The fact that Harris is both black and female could help her unlock the social justice warrior and feminist vote; on the other hand, her history as a prosecutor putting Blacks behind bars, already exposed during the Democratic debates, could cancel out the advantages of selecting a black female. Stacey Abrams, Washington Examiner's choice for second most likely, does not come with this sort of baggage and is also black and female. But again I have to disagree with the prediction - or, at least, voice my belief that Biden would be foolish to select Abrams.
First of all, the black demographic is already putty in Biden's hands because of Biden's legacy as Barack Obama's main man, and the one to have received Obama's endorsement. What Biden does not have on lock is the Hispanic vote, the fastest-growing demographic, and one that the Republicans, already decade ago, put forth a tremendous effort to try to pander to, even at risk of ostracizing middle-to-lower-class whites (1, 2).
Only in defeat did the Republicans apparently realize that, as long as whites were still somewhere around at least 60% of the national demographic, pandering to nationalist sentiment with "build the wall" rhetoric at the risk of losing Hispanic voters - while nevertheless minimizing racism to avoid public knee-jerk reactions - was a winning ticket. The strategy worked in 2016. The consequence of such pandering, however, is that the Hispanic demographic, which is already largely in the Democrats' hands for financial reasons (Hispanics are generally poor and poor vote overwhelmingly Democrat), can now be rallied to the Democrats when the Democrats present open-borders as a Latino issue and the Republicans as anti-Latino. This is all the more important because the Hispanic demographic is larger in 2020 than it was in 2016, which was larger than it was in 2012 or 2008 - explaining in large part why, here in 2020, Texas is getting close to going blue. Meanwhile, the white population is a smaller percentage of the population than it was in 2016, which means the Trump "build the wall!" strategy is less likely to succeed - especially now that he has isolated a good portion of his base with his "all talk" inaction.
Biden would be wise to remember how energized Blacks were for Obama and select a Hispanic Vice President to try to recreate that same energy among the valuable Hispanic vote, which will generate the predictable "a first for Latinos" hysteria. Make sure that Hispanic is a woman and now you are talking about pulling in all the feminists, who can already be energized over the Trump me-too connection. Finally, the candidate should have, at best, a neutral record when it comes to LGBT culture. Notably, a Vice President candidate like this would push many of the social justice buttons of progressive-ism without conceding on capitalist economics, which is exactly what the establishment left wishes to do, and what the establishment left can count on to unlock votes from Hispanic Republican and far-leftists alike, not to mention female Republicans and far-leftists and LGBT-minded and LGBT-friendly voters on both sides of the aisle. The only stipulation to add is that, to not polarize whites, the candidate should not be loud-mouthed. With these points in mind, you can begin to see where Catherine Cortez-Mastro really begins to rack up points. As we see from Mastro's Wikipedia entry, she is right about where she needs to be to get her constituency behind her, and well in-step with Biden:
From this analysis, you can really start to see why Democrats might wish to dial back their opposition to genetic-engineering in humans. Or just open the border, and start looking around for the right woman to fit the profile - or just force Julian Castro to undergo gender reassignment surgery.
Assuming the establishment really does want to oust Trump, however - assuming the social justice warriors would not rather be outside the White House gates, rallying the masses and lobbying critique, especially amidst the Coronavirus - the question is: how can the Democrats defeat Trump?
Because politics are really nothing but a demographic headcount, the answer probably lies in whether Biden selects the "right" Vice President. According to a report by the Washington Examiner, the following candidates are in the running (odds of being selected in parenthesis):
- Kamala Harris +250 (5/2)
- Stacey Abrams +400 (4/1)
- Sen. Amy Klobuchar +500 (5/1)
- Sen. Elizabeth Warren +800 (8/1)
- Pete Buttigieg +900 (9/1)
- Sen. Catherine Cortez-Masto +1000 (10/1)
- Julian Castro +1200 (12/1)
- Ohio Sen. Nina Turner +1400 (14/1)
- Sen. Tammy Baldwin +1400 (14/1)
- Rep. Tulsi Gabbard +2000 (20/1)
- Sen. Cory Booker +2500 (25/1)
- Hillary Clinton +2500 (25/1)
- Michelle Obama +2500 (25/1)
- Beto O'Rourke +2800 (28/1)
- Andrew Yang +3300 (33/1)
- Sen. Sherrod Brown +5000 (50/1)
The article suggests Harris has the greatest chance to become Biden's Vice President. The fact that Harris is both black and female could help her unlock the social justice warrior and feminist vote; on the other hand, her history as a prosecutor putting Blacks behind bars, already exposed during the Democratic debates, could cancel out the advantages of selecting a black female. Stacey Abrams, Washington Examiner's choice for second most likely, does not come with this sort of baggage and is also black and female. But again I have to disagree with the prediction - or, at least, voice my belief that Biden would be foolish to select Abrams.
First of all, the black demographic is already putty in Biden's hands because of Biden's legacy as Barack Obama's main man, and the one to have received Obama's endorsement. What Biden does not have on lock is the Hispanic vote, the fastest-growing demographic, and one that the Republicans, already decade ago, put forth a tremendous effort to try to pander to, even at risk of ostracizing middle-to-lower-class whites (1, 2).
Only in defeat did the Republicans apparently realize that, as long as whites were still somewhere around at least 60% of the national demographic, pandering to nationalist sentiment with "build the wall" rhetoric at the risk of losing Hispanic voters - while nevertheless minimizing racism to avoid public knee-jerk reactions - was a winning ticket. The strategy worked in 2016. The consequence of such pandering, however, is that the Hispanic demographic, which is already largely in the Democrats' hands for financial reasons (Hispanics are generally poor and poor vote overwhelmingly Democrat), can now be rallied to the Democrats when the Democrats present open-borders as a Latino issue and the Republicans as anti-Latino. This is all the more important because the Hispanic demographic is larger in 2020 than it was in 2016, which was larger than it was in 2012 or 2008 - explaining in large part why, here in 2020, Texas is getting close to going blue. Meanwhile, the white population is a smaller percentage of the population than it was in 2016, which means the Trump "build the wall!" strategy is less likely to succeed - especially now that he has isolated a good portion of his base with his "all talk" inaction.
Biden would be wise to remember how energized Blacks were for Obama and select a Hispanic Vice President to try to recreate that same energy among the valuable Hispanic vote, which will generate the predictable "a first for Latinos" hysteria. Make sure that Hispanic is a woman and now you are talking about pulling in all the feminists, who can already be energized over the Trump me-too connection. Finally, the candidate should have, at best, a neutral record when it comes to LGBT culture. Notably, a Vice President candidate like this would push many of the social justice buttons of progressive-ism without conceding on capitalist economics, which is exactly what the establishment left wishes to do, and what the establishment left can count on to unlock votes from Hispanic Republican and far-leftists alike, not to mention female Republicans and far-leftists and LGBT-minded and LGBT-friendly voters on both sides of the aisle. The only stipulation to add is that, to not polarize whites, the candidate should not be loud-mouthed. With these points in mind, you can begin to see where Catherine Cortez-Mastro really begins to rack up points. As we see from Mastro's Wikipedia entry, she is right about where she needs to be to get her constituency behind her, and well in-step with Biden:
Granted, she would have to put her gay-marriage opposition case (Sevcik v. Sandoval) in the proper context, and it would probably also help if she were more fresh-faced, hip, perhaps slightly darker:Political positions[edit]
Foreign policy[edit]
In April 2019, Cortez Masto was one of 34 senators to sign a letter to President Trump encouraging him "to listen to members of your own Administration and reverse a decision that will damage our national security and aggravate conditions inside Central America", asserting that Trump had "consistently expressed a flawed understanding of U.S. foreign assistance" since becoming president and that he was "personally undermining efforts to promote U.S. national security and economic prosperity" by preventing the use of Fiscal Year 2018 national security funding. The senators argued that foreign assistance to Central American countries created less migration to the U.S. by helping to improve conditions in those countries.[29]Environment[edit]
Cortez believes in human-caused climate change and that the federal government should limit power plants' greenhouse gas emissions.[30] She supports the growth of green jobs and increasing Nevada's reliance on solar power and other forms of clean energy. She opposes the use of Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste repository.[31]Gun law[edit]
The National Rifle Association (NRA) has given Cortez Masto a F grade due to her support for gun control. During the 2016 election, the NRA spent $1 million on an attack ad against her. She opposes allowing people on the terrorist watchlist to buy guns, saying that "makes no sense."[32]In response to the 2017 Las Vegas shooting, Cortez Masto co-sponsored a bill with Dianne Feinstein to ban bump stocks. She said that, although the bill cannot bring back those who died, it can be a start toward decreasing gun violence and mass shootings.[33]Health care[edit]
Cortez Masto does not support the repeal of the Affordable Care Act (also known as Obamacare).[30] She does support improving upon the act, which she has called "imperfect." She has co-sponsored the Marketplace Certainty Act to bring more stability to the health insurance marketplace.[34]In December 2018, Cortez Masto was one of 42 senators to sign a letter to Trump administration officials Alex Azar, Seema Verma, and Steve Mnuchin arguing that the administration was improperly using Section 1332 of the Affordable Care Act to authorize states to "increase health care costs for millions of consumers while weakening protections for individuals with pre-existing conditions." The senators requested the administration withdraw the policy and "re-engage with stakeholders, states, and Congress."[35]Housing[edit]
In April 2019, Cortez Masto was one of 41 senators to sign a bipartisan letter to the housing subcommittee praising the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development's Section 4 Capacity Building program as authorizing "HUD to partner with national nonprofit community development organizations to provide education, training, and financial support to local community development corporations (CDCs) across the country" and expressing disappointment that Trump's budget "has slated this program for elimination after decades of successful economic and community development." The senators wrote of their hope that the subcommittee would support continued funding for Section 4 in Fiscal Year 2020.[36]Human Trafficking[edit]
Cortez Masto has been a long-term crusader against human trafficking.In 2012 Amy Ayoub a well-respected political operative in Nevada, emotionally revealed to Masto, that she had been sex trafficked, and Masto says "she knew she had to do something about it"Cortez Masto tirelessly promoted the Sex Trafficking Bill, attending many functions and speaking events and on June 6, 2013, it was signed into law.In 2018 Masto introduced a bi-partisan bill with Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) that would establish an advisory committee to combat human trafficking of Native Americans and Alaskan Natives. And just before Christmas 2018, both the "Abolish Human Trafficking Act" and "Trafficking Victims Protection Act" were passed into law.In April 2019 Cortez Masto co-introduced the "Not Invisible Act of 2019", legislation aimed at addressing the crisis of missing, and trafficked Native people.Immigration[edit]
In April 2018, Cortez Masto was one of five senators to send a letter to acting director of ICE Thomas Homan about standards the agency uses to determine how to detain a pregnant woman, requesting that pregnant women not be held in custody except in extraordinary cases after reports "that ICE has failed to provide critical medical care to pregnant women in immigration detention—resulting in miscarriages and other negative health outcomes".[37]In June 2019, following the Housing and Urban Development Department's confirmation that DACA recipients did not meet eligibility for federal backed loans, Cortez Masto and 11 other senators introduced The Home Ownership Dreamers Act, legislation that mandated that the federal government was not authorized to deny mortgage loans backed by the Federal Housing Administration, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, or the Agriculture Department solely due to applicants' immigration status.[38]In July 2019, Cortez Masto and 15 other Senate Democrats introduced the Protecting Sensitive Locations Act, which mandated that ICE agents get approval from a supervisor ahead of engaging in enforcement actions at sensitive locations except in special circumstances, and that agents receive annual training in addition to being required to report annually on enforcement actions in those locations.[39]LGBT[edit]
Cortez Masto supports same-sex marriage.[30]Abortion and birth control[edit]
Cortez Masto is pro-choice.[30] In the 2016 election, she was endorsed by Planned Parenthood and funded by their action fund.[40]Additionally, she does not believe that companies should be allowed to withhold coverage for birth control based on religious beliefs.[30]Myanmar[edit]
In October 2017, Cortez Masto condemned the genocide of the Rohingya Muslim minority in Myanmar and called for a stronger response to the crisis.[41]Cannabis[edit]
Cortez Masto cosponsored the bipartisan STATES Act proposed in the 115th U.S. Congress by Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren and Colorado Senator Cory Gardner that would exempt individuals or corporations in compliance with state cannabis laws from federal enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act.[42]
| Candidate Prototype D112020VP: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Establishment disguised | ? |  |
| Young, but serious | ❌ | |
| LGBT, or rumored LGBT | ❌ | |
| Not too white | ❌ | |
| Spanish-speaking | ✔ | |
| Female, but high T | ✔ | |
Electable: ? | ||
From this analysis, you can really start to see why Democrats might wish to dial back their opposition to genetic-engineering in humans. Or just open the border, and start looking around for the right woman to fit the profile - or just force Julian Castro to undergo gender reassignment surgery.
