I’ve payed attention to New York Times columnist @TomFriedman for years and like him a lot. He has another recent installment describing his support for Bloomberg over any other candidate, and this longtime Bernie hopeful is with him on that. I agree 100% with everything his thoughtful article laid out.
But Friedman’s current proposition has one flaw in its logic, it is a fatal one, and it is the same one that Liberals fully ignore when they take the rare step of what they think is interacting with Conservatives. (No kudos to Conservatives there, they’ve been dismissing Liberals for a lot longer.) The proposition ignores they way public office holders are elected by people who have pre-existing interests.
I’m not sure whether it’s possible for anyone to beat Trump in November. If it’s to be done, it has to be done with an awareness of the mechanics of the 2016 election. Clinton may have won the popular vote, but enough people voted for Trump in (in)correctly-gerrymandered places to create a new paradigm. What the DNC can’t do is put up another candidate that is so repulsive to rural Americans that they are galvanized to strike a match and set the entire federal government (as they understand it, including the constitution, as they don’t) afire.
We know they could. Because they did.
Trump’s not going to lose by the Left being right-no-I-mean-really-really-morally-right about issues. Friedman’s proposition would give DNC loyalists the same fuzzy feeling we all get from Remember The Titans. But the first thought that would come to analytical Conservatives and askance Independents like me would be that the DNC called a huddle and the fusillade is gonna be awesome. Which means the second thought of many of us, and the first thought of all MAGAs, will be that they’re under attack. That is the condition when the Teflon King most galvanizes his sycophantic legion.
The only needed adjustment could occur in that same closed-door meeting we imagine preceding Friedman’s article, except for there to be cabinet positions open to a few good Republican names. They do exist. Fitzpatrick’s a very good one. So is John Kasich, and he’s got a world of name recognition. I’ll bet these reluctant party loyalists would make a private commitment with a promise of precisely-timed public announcement. I’ll bet they could even get Susan Collins, which would be a huge kidney shot to the RNC. It’s like E.J. Dionne, another analyst I admire, seems to say in his book: “…leadership can come only from Democrats and disaffected Republicans courageous enough to stand up to Trump.”
That kind of scrum could plow the field.