How Much More Crowded Can the Dems’ 2020 Field Get?
(Photo Credit: Beto O’Rourke/Twitter)
- Strengthening the safety net for farmers by bolstering federal crop insurance programs.
- Defending the Affordable Care Act and opposing cuts to Medicaid and Social Security.
- Promoting policies that encourage companies to invest in their surrounding companies.
- Barring the use of public tax dollars for private schools.
- Optimizing the use of current resources while incentivizing renewable energy sources.
- Supporting the Equality Act, repealing the Defense of Marriage Act, and ensuring equal pay for equal work.
- Imposing term limits, refusing money from political action committees, and ending partisan redistricting.
- Requiring background checks for all gun sales and prohibiting the sale of military-grade weapons and high-capacity magazines.
- Promoting universal health care.
- Increasing funding for Pell Grant scholarships and the Federal Perkins Loan program.
- Ending the militarization of our immigration enforcement system and closing private immigration prisons and for-profit detention centers.
- Investing in apprenticeship, certification, and training programs that will help those without college degrees keep pace in an era of increasing specialization.
- Ending the war on drugs and the federal prohibition of marijuana.
- Defining “victory” in a military/diplomatic sense and outlining a strategy to achieve it
- Exercising appropriate oversight of Medicare.
- Improving access to care and housing for veterans.
- Ensuring a woman’s right to choose and guaranteeing access to birth control and emergency contraception.
Evidently, the bar for political entry is a low one to clear these days. Whether it’s the need to satisfy an electorate desperate for novelty and voices outside the established vanguard, that someone like Donald Trump has already done gone blown up the whole system we thought we knew, or both, party supporters appear to need only to hear one inspiring speech from an individual before signing on for his or her presidential run. Oprah Winfrey, for one, has been an oft-speculated-about figure ever since she made a stirring speech at the 2018 Golden Globes after accepting the Cecil B. DeMille Award. The acceptance speech touched on various themes, including racial justice, the need to defend a free press, and female empowerment. It was a well-written, well-delivered speech, and Winfrey is clearly a people person and born entrepreneur. Not only has she not expressed a clear desire to run for president in 2020, however, but we know very little about what she stands for apart from her stances on the aforementioned issues. Michelle Obama, an Ivy League-educated woman with a best-selling book out and a stadium tour soon to begin, has similarly raised consciousness about various topics, include healthy eating, women’s rights, and supporting military families, but has yet to affirm a bid for the White House and has indicated little about a developed platform along these lines. As with Winfrey, the belief in Michelle Obama as a viable presidential candidate lies heavily in that she talks a good game. With Obama in particular, it also probably helps that her husband spent two terms in the Oval Office and overall public opinion of him remains high. Speaking of Barack Obama, prior to becoming President of the United States, he was a relatively young and untested senator from Illinois. He didn’t have all that much experience to his name before his keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention helped vault him into the national consciousness. As many Americans would agree, he managed to do a fair job, and could’ve done perhaps an even better one if not for Republican obstructionism in Congress. If he, a neophyte of sorts, could fulfill the duties of the highest political office in all the land, why couldn’t Oprah or Michelle? Certainly, they’d be a better choice than Donald Trump, no? While, again, this is not to say that they can’t or even shouldn’t run, it is worth wondering what it says about us that we’d be willing to go “all in” on them or someone like Beto O’Rourke despite such little exposure. In the case of Barack Obama, though I may have some misgivings about some of his policy directives, I submit he is of uncommonly strong character. The way he carried himself during his presidency was such that even at his worst, he still projected a certain sense of dignity and resolve. Beto may have much of the same qualities as Barack Obama, but it would be unwise to expect too much of him, and at that, to expect that his candidacy alone would be enough to propel the Democratic Party in an exciting new direction. After eight years of Barack, we got Trump. Good as his showing in Texas was, Beto still lost. The party’s commitment must be more than just to one or a handful of candidates. It should be issue-driven and focused on the people to be affected by these stances rather than the names on the ballots. Even with the best men and women running for office, a weak party infrastructure is damaging to the cause. As the weeks pass, the Democrats’ field for 2020 promises only to get more crowded, as does their desire to remove Donald Trump from office. For them and for us as voters, it bears questioning what we expect from a candidate for public office and what specific problems we want addressed by today’s political leaders. If this does not help narrow the pool of candidates, we are not doing our due diligence as political participants.