The Democratic Party has been split between two major caucuses for the last 55 years, the Progressives, and the New Democrats. New Democrats were founded in the 1970s with the belief that the failure of Democrats to win in 1972 was because they were too liberal under Johnson, so they moved the party in a more conservative direction. They are reactionary conservatives.
Presidents Kennedy and Johnson were undeniably more liberal than most of their succeeding presidents. While some basic democratic ideas stayed with the party, namely the importance of government involvement in health care, you saw a weaker approach towards education spending. But even still, Presidents Carter, Clinton, and Obama all worked to increase access to health care for everyday Americans.
One important piece of progress the New Democrats brought to the table was bringing in modern economic research for trade to the platform and the signing of free trade deals. But this was already a part of President Johnson’s platform in 1964, so the New Democrats merely continued this to the present day.
The main issues progressive democrats bring to the table are:
- Strong support for trust-busting
- Support for nationalizing natural monopolies
- Universal health care
- Tuition free or debt-free college (varies by progressive)
Many progressive democrats have unfortunately swallowed the fair trade poison like President Biden did. This is clearly a mistake when looking at the impacts of countries which have tried this approach. It makes sense to have basic health and safety standards, but attacking free trade is a mistake. We don’t find this same thread of politics in non-Anglo developed countries to the same extent. Britain has it to the extreme, as we have seen with the consequences of Brexit.
If progressive democrats truly cared about the environment there are better methods than supporting tariffs. We should start with a carbon tax, which will be far more effective.
So, moving down the list from 1972 to present, using Keys to the White House as our guide, let’s see how we can get America on the right track.
1972
In 1972 Democrats put forward George McGovern, an opponent of the Vietnam War. However, Richard Nixon had only 4 negative keys so it would have taken a miracle for a Democrat to win.
1976
Gerald Ford had 8 negative keys, so Democrats would have won with basically anyone and President Carter fit the bill.
1980
President Carter had 8 false keys. In order to win we would have needed:
- No primary contest
- More charisma from Carter
- Deal with the Iran hostage crisis better
- Pass a major law
So there was basically no democrat who would have won the 1980 election.
1984
With only two false keys, Reagan was a shoe in. It didn’t matter who we ran.
1988
With only 3 false keys, George H.W. Bush was all but certain to win reelection.
1992-1996
President Bush had 6 false keys so the election was a toss-up and it turned out to be so in the election. Bush lost because of a spoiler effect from Ross Perot. The same thing happened in 1996 for Bob Dole.
I do not think Clinton would have won either election if Bob Dole had not run. Since Clinton had 5 false keys, a charismatic Republican candidate in 1996 would have won the presidency.
2000
Al Gore ran a good campaign, and he probably won the election based on how the Supreme Court stopped the count before it was finished.
2004
Bush had only 4 false keys, so its not surprising that he beat John Kerry. I argue he actually had only 3 false keys because the PATRIOT ACT was a major policy change. It would have been very difficult to beat him in 2004.
2008-2012
Obama ran a fantastic campaign and Bush was extremely unpopular with 9 false keys. Obama governed extremely well in his first term and had only three false keys (arguably two, I am not convinced he was uncharismatic in 2012) so its not surprising he won in 2012. Obama had the fewest false keys of any Democrat since 1964.
2016
This is where we hit a problem… up until this year the election would have been an extremely uphill battle or Democrats won. But Hillary Clinton was an extremely uncharismatic candidate, with a flawed strategy. With 6 false keys it is not surprising she lost. Arguably she had 7 false keys because of the handling of the initial Invasion of Ukraine.
Perhaps the biggest reason Clinton lost was when she said single-payer health care will never-ever happen. What type of voter does this attract to her who would ever consider voting for her in the first place? She focused on opposing a proposal similar to what she and her husband worked on. This is why she was uncharismatic.
The other problem was the handling of the Invasion of Ukraine. This gave Clinton a false key (arguably bringing her up to 7 false keys) and prevented an easy military success during Obama’s second term. I believe the Russian invasion of Ukraine successfully set the presidency up for Donald Trump to win.
Clinton still won the popular vote despite this however, which shows just how terrible a person Donald Trump is.
2020
Joe Biden was not just running against Donald Trump, he was running against the plague. The lack of CDC monitoring in China helping track COVID was a major foreign policy failure. If the PATRIOT ACT is not a major policy change I do not see how a single tax bill is, bringing Trump up to 9 false keys.
There was no way the Democrats could have lost the 2020 election.
2024
2024 however is where I think there have been some major miscalculations and showed some issues with the system.
Even though the economic fundamentals were strong we had a K-shaped recovery after the First Trump recession. This created the feeling of a weak economy for millions of Americans. This brings Harris up to 6 false keys.
Biden had no military or foreign policy success. 7 false keys.
Biden did not pass any major policy change aside from a one time bailout of suburbia. 8 false keys.
This is why I believe if we had been more proactive in supplying Ukraine with better weapons sooner it would have solved the economic keys and foreign policy keys, giving Harris an easy win.
This is why Harris became only the second Democrat to lose the popular vote in the last 30 years.
Thoughts
Whether our nominee is a progressive or a new democrat only impacts the uncharismatic challenger key. Obama was the only charismatic challenger in the last 30 years according to the system, and he was the most relatively progressive candidate of the Democratic Party in this time period. So the whole argument of “we need a candidate who can defeat ___” is nonsense.
What matters however is how the president will lead, whether the president will have enough keys to be reelected. This is where it is obvious that the caucus membership of the president matters a lot.
So this leads us to what Democrats need to do in order to win and why I believe the following platform will lead Democrats to victory, put in terms of the thirteen keys to the presidency:
- Party Mandate: Have a functional party machine and a president who isn’t doing stupid stuff.
- No primary contest: Likely true if the president is doing a good job
- Incumbent seeking re-election: If the president is in good health and has done a good job, they will likely run again.
- No third party: Likely true if the other keys are true.
- Strong short-term economy: Don’t screw up. Do not implement random tariffs like Trump and lead with a steady hand.
- Strong long-term economy: Don’t screw up.
- Major policy change: Pass health care reform to bring America’s uninsured rate to 0 within 4 years.
- No social unrest: Unlikely if other keys are true.
- No scandal: Keep it in your pants.
- Major foreign or military failure: Condition weapons shipments to Israel like every other country.
- Major foreign or military success: Ukraine must win and gain NATO membership.
- Charismatic incumbent: Have good social skills.
- Uncharismatic challenger: Get lucky.
This is the recipe for a president who will likely win reelection.
A president this successful will have no difficulty getting reelected.
I think a democrat who more firmly supports Medicare for all or just focuses on getting health insurance to every American while controlling health care costs will likely win reelection. Combine this with competent and humane foreign policy and the president will be a slam dunk for reelection.
Why not a centrist?
If we look at potential 2028 presidential democratic candidates, each self-avowed centrist has at least one major issue which I believe will make it very difficult for them to get reelected.
I do not think anyone from Biden’s cabinet will run given the current scandal that they hid his health from the public. Tim Walz will likely fail because he was Harris’ running mate.
Any candidate who is willing to vote for Trump’s laughable nominees is uncharismatic and will likely be trying similar failed approaches to passing policy as president.
Aside from these basic requirements, it more has to do not with winning but what direction we want the country to go? Do we want to live in a country which stands for democracy around the world, believes LGBT folk deserve basic human rights, and that we should guide our decisions based on science and reason? Do we want to have a country not guided by values but by immediately perceived political expediency, damn the consequences? Do we want to live in a country without birth control, where people are rounded up, a restrictive visa policy, and reactionary conservatism?
Any of these are technically capable of winning reelection given that they don’t screw up the economy, do not fund genocide, and uphold America’s treaties.
If one had to be a progressive in order to win there is no way Bush would have won reelection in 2004. Bush was far from centrist, and he won a majority of the popular vote.
So it’s clear that conservative democrats can theoretically win reelection. It has to do with what type of nation do we want to be?
If you believe its fine when UN buildings are bombed, if its fine when Russians kill civilians in their homes, and its not a problem when women are beaten in the streets for not wearing a Burqa, then I suppose you shouldn’t vote for a progressive democrat.
However, if you see these as major violations of international law and human rights, then we should vote for a president who will stand up to bullies.
That’s what it comes down to. Any type of politician can win. That’s not the question.
The question is who do we want to be?