Cromwell

Bernie Sanders’ only executive experience came as the mayor of a small city in Vermont decades ago. If he is elected, his administration will probably be filled with young, inexperienced people, as he will view any figures from what he views as a failed, sellout Obama administration with great suspicion. Is this the kind of government you want in a crisis?

Yes, even the virus is working for Biden at this point.

Biden will need the support of the Bernie Bros in the general election if, as expected, he is the nominee. How can he campaign against Sanders without offending them?

One way is to use Bernie’s own words against him. The obvious choice is “revolution.” That doesn’t sound too appealing to the elderly and swing voters, but it is the essence of the Sanders campaign. Bernie can hardly disown it at this point. Just say in a matter-of-fact way that you are in favor of incremental reforms, while your opponent wants a “revolution,” and the moderate case practically makes itself.

Since we’re replaying the 2016 election, with Biden standing in for Clinton, how do the two stack up? Here’s my analysis:

1. Clinton was a sharper debater and overall campaigner than Biden;
2. Biden has far less historical baggage;
3. Hunter and Ukraine won’t have the same impact as Clinton’s e-mails, as the MSM have learned their lesson;
4. Biden won’t have any identity politics issues, because he’s, well, a man; and
5. This time, Trump will have to run on his record, not a pile of meaningless promises.

In short, Biden, on the whole, is better positioned than Clinton was if, as seems likely, he wins the nomination.

2016 winner: Clinton

Overview: Florida is a demographic nightmare for Sanders: lots of old people; few young people; Hispanics who are more concerned about Maduro and Cuba than the wall. Expect a lot of talk about Social Security in his commercials; the revolution, not so much.

The prediction: A blowout win for Biden. Sanders will never recover.

December 8, 1941

President Trump denied widespread reports of a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor this morning. Later in the day, when confronted with video evidence of the attack, he admitted that it had occurred, but called articles referring to large numbers of casualties and massive damage “fake news” generated by Democrats to make him look bad. He went on to say that he had a “hunch” that the Pacific Fleet would be operating at full strength in no time, and he advised the public to buy stocks to show their faith in him and America. A tax cut is also under consideration to rebuild consumer confidence.

To Warren and her supporters, the answer is clear. She ran the best campaign, had the most and best plans, and was the most effective debater. She deserved to win. That she didn’t was clearly the result of sexism. What else could it be?

The truth is more complicated than that. Warren fell short for three reasons:

1. Her complete embrace of the Sanders agenda meant she would have no following among the moderates, who represent a majority of the electorate;
2. Her campaign narrative changed from week to week. She was the wonky woman with many plans, an Oklahoma populist, Bernie with brains, and the Goldilocks candidate, just to name a few. Some of these were mutually exclusive. The voters were confused; and
3. Yes, she was a victim of identity politics, but not just because she was female; the voters recognized that she was wide open to attacks on elitism in November. If you don’t believe it, just ask yourself if a male Harvard professor would have done any better. The honest answer to the question is no.

And so ends my Warren’s day blog feature. Regular programming will resume on Wednesdays.

2016 winner: Sanders

Overview: Biden has the momentum, and he could close the deal by winning in this Sanders-friendly state. Bernie’s protectionism resonates here, however, and his money is funding an effective air campaign. There are no debates prior to the election. Biden will hit Bernie on his equivocal position on the auto bailout, but will that be enough?

The prediction: Sanders ekes out a slim victory and stays alive for another week.

A switch in time saved Biden. That’s the real story of Super Tuesday.

Yes, Biden performed better at the last debate, and campaigned effectively in SC. He doesn’t win a decisive victory on Super Tuesday, however, if Mayor Pete and Klobuchar wait until Wednesday to drop out, as you would normally expect them to do. Biden owes them an immense debt of gratitude for their unselfishness.

Additional credit should go to Elizabeth Warren, for eviscerating Bloomberg, and to Jim Clyburn, who saved Biden’s bacon in SC.

Now we are looking at a replay of 2016, as I predicted in January. I will be discussing it from every imaginable angle over the next week or so.

A wise businessman never throws good money after bad. The realo consolidation is at last complete. It’s high time.

2016, here we come!

It has become thunderingly obvious that Warren has no path to the nomination. There will be no brokered convention and no successful unity candidate. So what now?

She could drop out and throw her support to Sanders, of course. The other possibility would be to maintain just enough of a campaign to qualify for the remaining debates and to use her speaking time to annihilate Biden. Bernie doesn’t have the skill to do that, but she does.

Would she try it? It would mean burning her bridges with most of the rest of the party. The safe bet would be no. The possibility cannot be entirely dismissed, however.

I can’t resist pointing out that my prediction from about six weeks ago was dead on target. We are exactly where I thought we would be after Super Tuesday.

The most likely outcome now is a rerun of 2016. If the race boils down to just Sanders and Biden, the latter should win, because: Sanders has shown over and over again that his theory of mobilizing huge numbers of disaffected left-leaning voters simply doesn’t work in practice; and progressives only represent about 40 percent of Democratic primary voters. If you don’t believe me on the electorate, just do the math; progressives only won a majority in Nevada.

Could anything upset Biden’s road to the nomination? That depends on Warren and Bloomberg. More on that later.

On the ex-KGB man Vlad Putin.

For Sanders and Trump he’ll be rootin’.

Cause Bernie’s all talk

And Trump is no hawk.

He’ll win either way, you’re darn tootin’.

I ultimately donated to Klobuchar because I thought she was the most electable of the Biden replacement candidates, and I wanted to give her a chance. It didn’t work out, as she apparently has no appeal to minorities, but I have no regrets.

She is getting out at the right time. After tomorrow, it should be Bloomberg’s turn. That is when the race begins in earnest.

It’s always better to leave the party too early than too late. By exiting before Super Tuesday, Mayor Pete creates a legacy of excitement and incomplete success, not failure. He would also make a very plausible running mate for Biden, although I think Harris would make a better choice, for reasons I will describe in the future.

Assuming, for purposes of argument, that he isn’t on the ticket, he could be a serious contender for the nomination for the next two decades if he plays his cards right. That means generating some additional experience in office and convincing minorities that he views them as people to be helped, not problems to be solved. RFK after his brother’s death comes to mind as a precedent. How should he do that? I will leave that up to him.

Biden needed to win a decisive victory in SC or leave the race. He got the former, and thereby extinguished the rationales for the Klobuchar and Mayor Pete candidacies.

Next stop, Super Tuesday. The new question is whether Bloomberg has any kind of a realistic chance. If, as I suspect, he runs well behind Biden, he needs to exit and focus his fire on Trump and Sanders.