A Word With an Old Friend

I don't need to tell you most of this.  You have your own news sources.  Probably we share a lot of them.  CNN.  PBS.  MSNBC.  The New York Times.  Some of the more intelligent online publications.  (I always check 538, even though I question some of the polls they rely on.  I mean, who trusts HarrisX?)

If you're like me, you probably even have a few non-American sources.  The Guardian app is my go-to for anything, even news of the US.  If you haven't found it yet, you'd like it.

And of course, we each hear from our respective campaigns.  I get daily blasts from Charlestown, what the folks at Warren HQ want us to hear.  I'm sure you get the same thing from Bernie's staff.  We're citizens, of course, but we are also, in the end, pawns in a very big game.

Anyway, we both know something about where this campaign seems to be going.  And if I like it better than you - and of course, I do - I still feel a reflexive twinge every time I see Bernie's numbers bump down another half-point in the aggregates. 

I love that man.  Honor him.  He's an American hero.  If he's not the next President, whoever is should give him the Medal of Freedom.

No, Bernie should have been the nominee in '16.  I don't know if he was actually robbed, but for sure, he was mugged.  If the DNC had left it to us - if they'd remembered what the "D" stands for - he might have been the nominee, for real.

And if he had been, I think he wins.  And the Trump nightmare would have been just that, a bad dream.

I expect you ended up voting for Hillary.  I couldn't get there.  I lived in Virginia then, and with Tim Kaine on the ticket, Hillary was going to get our electoral votes.  I ended up voting for that young guy from Utah - McMillan?, McMullen?, whatever...

Yeah.  Bernie got screwed in '16.  We all did.

But this year, you're with The Bern, and I'm with Liz Warren.  And so far, they've made a great team - advocating a similar vision for America, watching each other's backs in the "debates".  It's been nice to see.

I hope that doesn't change now, when things are starting to shake out.  Like I say, you get the same news - read same polls - as I do.  This has turned into a three-person race, but it's starting to look, more and more, like it's becoming more a two-person race:  Warren vs. Biden.

I know.  I said it.  Looks like it's going to be Liz or Joe. 

I expect you're starting to see that, too - and you don't want to believe it.  I get it.  I've been there, more times than I can count.  But for Bernie, there's a special pain.  It just isn't fair.  Such a great man.  Remarkable.  Courageous. 

Fun.  Remember how much fun it was in '16, when it actually started to look like he would take the Party away from the Clintons, the Wall Street Democrats, the DLC-types - and turn it into a party of the people again? 

Bernie did that.  Nobody else could have done it.  Where we are now - we wouldn't be there without The Bern.

Like I say, it just ain't fair.

But I ask you honestly, as a friend - if you're ready to hear the question - can you see a way forward?Is there a scenario where Bernie wins this time?  I mean, I'm all-in for Liz, but if Bernie somehow pulls this thing out, I'm grinning from ear to ear.

I just don't see how he does it.

So I'm asking - friend to friend.  Can you draw me a map, paint me a picture, tell me a story that ends up with Bernie as the nominee, and then the President?  Can you envision how he snatches victory from the jaws of - well - the present situation?

And it's okay if you can't do that right now.  Take as long as you want.

Just this.  If you get to a place where you can't see a way forward - please - it can't be Biden.  It just can't.  I don't think Biden wins against Trump.  I'm damn sure he doesn't have the coattails to take back the Senate.  But even if he pulls it off, President Joe means four years of nothing much - half-assed gestures with the world on fire. 

Literally, on fire.

And then, Joe's what, 80? - and he probably loses to somebody worse than Trump.  (And there could be somebody worse.  Imagine a guy with Trump's ideology, but twenty years younger, with a better  understanding of how government works, no hint of senility, more focused, skilled at building teams, with a thicker skin, etc.)

Really, it just can't be Joe.

So anyway - that's what I have to say.  No pressure.  We both love Bernie.  You keep giving him the support he deserves.

But when the time comes - if it comes - try talking the old gang into helping Liz.  After all, we're still fighting the same damn people - the Wall Street Democrats - and they're already trying to rig this thing for Joe - or anyone who won't upset the big-money donors too much.

You know that, as well as I do.  Maybe better.

I guess that's it.  Good seeing you.  Keep in touch.

And keep fightin' the good fight.

Can Oregon Matter?

Hundreds of Oregonians have already enlisted in the fight to make Elizabeth Warren the next President of the United States.  Many hundreds.  We could be into the thousands by now.

There's enormous activity in Portland and its near-in suburbs, where PDX for Warren has generated the sort of passion I associate with Bobby Kennedy's campaign in '68, or Bernie Sanders' first run four years ago. 

But there's also activity elsewhere, including parts of the state where you might not expect to find cheerful demonstrations of loyalty to a Democratic candidate.  More on that below.

Occasionally, however - for all this incredible stir and bustle - someone will ask the question:  Does this really matter? 

Will all this activity - the rallies, the volunteer training, the canvassing, the phone-banking, the burgeoning cottage industry devoted to button-making - actually make any difference?

Will Oregon matter?

It's a good question.  Oregon is, after all, one of the last states to hold a primary - on May 19.  Oregon won't send a huge delegation to the Democratic National Convention in Milwaukie, Wisconsin.  Indeed, if the 2020 primary season goes true to form, there will almost certainly be a nominee - or at least, a prohibitive favorite - before Oregon votes.

Moving on to November - unless there's a political revolution of catastrophic proportions - Oregon will award its seven electoral votes to whomever the Democratic Party nominates.  Which means that, during the general election campaign, neither member of the Democratic ticket will waste time visiting Oregon.  A Democratic ticket that doesn't carry Oregon would be doomed to humiliating defeat.

So - in terms of affecting the choice of a president - can Oregon matter?

This post will argue that it can, but first, a little background.

I'm very new to Oregon.  I moved to the north coast in August, 2018, after a lifetime in Virginia.  Back east, I'd been involved in politics, on and off, all my life - which tends to happen when your dear old dad serves eighteen years in the state legislature.  But I had absolutely no thought of becoming involved in politics in my new state.

Then the presidential campaign started up.  It felt important, so I looked over the field and did my due diligence.  I narrowed my choices down to three, then two, then - finally - one.  A good one.

So in early July, I decided to find out who was organizing for Elizabeth Warren here in Clatsop County.  (If you don't know Oregon, think of it as an envelope.  Clatsop is where you'd affix the address label.)  I checked around, went to a local Democratic Committee meeting, and found out.

Nobody.

Nobody was organizing for Warren, or really, anyone else.  So I located the Portland group and wound up in touch with Kevin, a bright young guy who's one of Liz Warren's potential "West Wing" team.  He asked if I'd head up the campaign here in Clatsop County - which sounded pretty low-key - and I accepted.

Then I did a little research into Oregon politics.  I learned that, traditionally, the Democratic Party of Oregon focuses on getting out the vote in the 7 "blue" counties around Portland, Salem, and Eugene - i.e., the upper I-5 corridor.  Win those seven counties, they know, and you can elect the Governor, the two US Senators, at least three of our five members of the House of Representatives, and a majority of the state legislature.

And that's how it works.  Rural Oregon - even the tourist and retirement towns that dot our truly dramatic coastline - are afterthoughts.  Like our larger neighbor to the north, Washington, Oregon is a "red" state that votes "blue" because of a big metropolis.  Nine-tenths of our territory votes Republican.  Even my county, which is marginally "blue" - while appreciated - plays little role in the Party's calculations.  Some really progressive people out here, but not enough population.

And that's when I got involved in something slightly more ambitious than my nominal job here in Clatsop.  I contacted a few other volunteer local leaders in counties not deemed essential by the Democratic Party of Oregon.  We decided to make a modest effort at connecting with each other and finding local leaders in neighboring counties in the western third of the state..

To my surprise, the leaders of Warren's powerful Portland group sympathized.  So in August, I scored a couple hundred of their hand-made buttons, met with another local leader at the State Central Committee meeting in Newberg, and started recruiting rural-county leaders in earnest. 

One month and many road-trips - including four over-nighters - later, we had leaders in a third of Oregon's 36 counties, and were close to being organized in a half-dozen more.  And our ambitions changed from organizing the counties in the western half of the state to something we call the "36-County Project" - an effort to have Elizabeth Warren organized in every county of the state. 

Since then, a lot more local leaders have joined the effort.  I recruited a "road warrior" from Portland who made the 450-mile round trip to Canyon City one week, and a 500-mile run to La Grande the next.

The energy for our project has become, in effect, self-sustaining.  We're reaching out to every corner of the state, with good hopes of having an active group working in every county before the Iowa caucuses.  We've even won support from the national headquarters in Charlestown, Mass.

And in the process, we've found a purpose. Actually, two purposes.

First, we're asking all Oregonians for their votes.

We represent a brilliant woman who was born and raised in Norman, Oklahoma.  Who was a high school debating champion in Oklahoma.  Who attended college in Houston, Texas.  A red-state gal who was still a Republican when she was hired to teach law at Harvard.  A legal scholar who changed her politics, her party - and her life - after scholarly research into America's bankruptcy laws persuaded her that predatory lending was destroying millions of American families.

A candidate, in short, who speaks "red-state". 

Elizabeth Warren might not make it to Enterprise, or Ontario, or La Grande - or even to Bend or Medford - during this campaign.  But she needs to ask folks in those "red counties" for their votes.  Through us. 

Because, by asking for their votes, she will open a dialogue that will help enormously when she is President - which all of us, of course, believe she will be.

That's the first purpose behind our project.  You can only bring the American people together if you have asked them - all of them - for their support on your way to the White House.  You might not get their votes, but if you've asked, you've started a conversation.

The second purpose is this:  As far as I know - and I've travelled a good deal of the state now - we're the only campaign making this sort of effort.  True, Bernie Sanders has some passionate loyalists everywhere I go - and I get that.  I was for Bernie in 2016 - and I'm still angry about the way he was treated by the DNC during the primary campaign.

But I've seen little serious effort to organize for Bernie as of yet.  Outside the Portland area, no other candidate - other than Yang - is putting in much effort at all.  Which means, in a sense, that Elizabeth Warren has a clear field in Oregon.  If we can direct our energies into organizing - not only in the seven "blue" counties, but across the whole state - we can go a long way toward locking up Oregon for Elizabeth Warren before the primary season starts.

Think of it this way.  If, by the time the Iowa caucuses meet, the national press can report that Elizabeth Warren's volunteers in Oregon have the state so well-organized that the other campaigns have decided not to invest resources here - that they're writing it off - that's kinda like Oregon had promoted itself to an early primary state.

Indeed, if we've got Oregon fully organized - with folks canvassing in every county - by January, we could actually cast the first vote - ahead of Iowa and New Hampshire.  Ahead of everyone.

What we do - if we do it thoroughly - could make a real difference in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina.  It could make a real difference in Washington and California on Super Tuesday. 

It could make Oregon important in a way that our late primary, and our dependably Democratic electoral votes, never could.

And that's why we're doing this.  To make a difference - right here in Oregon.

The Third Democratic Debate

People who witness public events usually see what they expect to see.  Depending upon their personalities, that could mean they see what they hope for - or what they dread. 

Being a mere mortal, I can't claim to be any more objective than the next observer.  My one advantage is that, as a student of history, I tend to take a longer view than most Americans - for what that's worth.

So, with that disclaimer, here's one man's take on last night's "debate":

The evening of September 12 probably didn't change the reality that this has become a three-way race among Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren. 

In truth, none of the top three surprised anyone.  Bernie was Bernie - the feisty Bernie progressives, as well as comic impressionists everywhere, dearly love.

Joe was his likable, grandfatherly self, though worryingly showing his age and lack of contact with the times. 

Liz was steady, thoughtful, and passionate, but she did introduce one new argument which she will doubtless develop over the coming months - that no American is in love with their health insurance company.  This might prove the answer to doubts about Medicare for All.  If a public option can be designed that offers the same or better coverage - and the same or better choice of doctors - no American will weep for their lost relationship with Aetna, Cigna, or Blue Cross.

All in all, it would be surprising if we enter Iowa and New Hampshire with anyone, other than these three, as serious contenders.

Five other candidates had their moments on the stage, doing well enough to justify staying in the race a bit longer.  This was particularly true of Beto O'Rourke, who will probably enjoy a nice, if ephemeral, bump in the polls after his passionate articulation of a gun policy most sane Americans would actually like to see as law.

Two candidates - Amy Klobuchar and Andrew Yang are probably done.  Klobuchar has established herself as an intelligent and thoughtful centrist, and a senator of genuine character.  However, she lacks the ability to transmit her inner fire over the medium of television - at least, in the bizarre format of a ten-person "debate".  In another era, with different technology- or perhaps simply in a different format - she might be among the leaders now.  But this is not her year.

Yang, like the excluded Tulsi Gabbard, has become something of a cult figure in this race.  But in 2020, there will be room for only one cult figure - and he will be running for re-election.  Yang and Gabbard have enough passionate fans to insist that they hang around for awhile.  Yang loses nothing by doing so.  Gabbard will likely forfeit her seat in Congress, which would be a loss for the public discourse.

Besides Gabbard, none of those failing to make this debate has much reason to soldier on.  One - Steve Bullock - will do his party and his country a positive disservice if he fails to go home to challenge Senator Steve Daines.  If the Republicans end up holding the Senate by one seat, and Bullock does not run, he will merit a far grimmer place in history than he aspires to.

In a similar vein, Tom Steyer - yet one more rich guy who seems unaware that no businessman (other than a few plantation owners) has ever succeeded as President - could be spending his millions to help end the reign of Mitch McConnell as Senate Majority Leader.  Instead, Steyer's ego has him pouring good money after bad.  He'll be on the debate stage in October, and then - when he finds out how different debating is from making video spots - quietly disappear.

To me, the most interesting story coming out of this debate was watching two young candidates begin to maneuver for positions in the next Democratic administration.

The always impressive Pete Buttigieg, in a well-reasoned passage about America reclaiming its place as the world's leader, made a strong case for being our next Secretary of State.  It's the job I've always seen him in - the ideal place for a brilliant, nuanced young person (think, Thomas Jefferson) to prepare himself for a future Presidency.

Julian Castro made a different choice - probably aiming to be the running mate of either Sanders or Warren.  His attack on Joe Biden was clearly a pre-planned take-out move, and it was fairly brutal.  Yet, for all the negative instant reaction, I suspect it will prove effective.  Liberals and progressives have a terrible tendency to be too nice by far - a characteristic they don't need when preparing for the open warfare of 2020.  Nominating a flawed candidate, out of fear of seeming "ageist", would be the height of folly.

What Castro did was to point out that the Emperor is rather scantily clad.  Nobody wanted to say it, but it's what many of us have been thinking - that the Joe Biden of 2019 reminds us of the Ronald Reagan of 1984. 

With that thought comes the fear that he he cannot be counted on to perform well in the WWE grudge-match of a one-on-one debate against the President next fall.  Also, doubts that his policies and elder-statesman persona will attract the youth vote needed to flip the Senate, and hold the House.

In taking on Biden, Castro might have sacrificed himself.  But, assuming no politician sets out to be a hero without some thought for his future, he might also be hoping that the opprobrium of the moment will fade - and that he has positioned himself to be the attack-dog running-mate either Sanders or Warren would choose to take on Mike Pence.