With only slightly more than two months until the first contest of the Democratic nominating process (the Iowa Caucus on February 3), we see the race as becoming a divisive contest between the Progressive and Establishment wings. We believe the Progressives have the advantage and will prevail.
Let’s start with the Establishment wing and the three “B” candidates (Bloomberg, Biden and Buttigieg). Mayor Bloomberg’s entrance into the race signals panic among the Establishment that their preferred candidate, former Vice President Joe Biden, may not make it. His debate performance this past week highlighted the challenge. Biden committed several significant gaffes and became fodder for Saturday Night Live which has had fun mercilessly making jokes at his expense. Biden is also having trouble fund raising, has sparse crowds on the campaign trail and is relying on endorsements to stay relevant. Today, for example, he was endorsed by former US Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack in Iowa. This is a classic establishment approach to politics, but it is less and less relevant in the age of twitter and social media. Biden’s strategy is to keep highlighting that he is electable, play up his name recognition and hope that the Party will coalesce around him as a candidate that is acceptable to most Democrats, particularly if he were to select a progressive Vice President such as Stacey Abrams. He’s got a chance, but we would not bet on it.
Then there is Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who jumped to the front of the Iowa polls the past two weeks. Buttigieg appeals to white, college educated liberals who are concerned that Warren may be too liberal to win. Another advantage is that Buttigieg is so unknown, that he does not have much of a record to attack. However, there is a sense among party leaders that Buttigieg is not ready for prime time. His lack of support among black and hispanic voters is striking and combined with his lack of experience (a two term mayor of a small city) and weak head-to-head polling v. Trump, his candidacy does not look promising. Among the less radical Democrats, we believe his star has already started to fade and believe his chances are currently overrated.
That leads us to Bloomberg. Bloomberg is the ideal candidate for Democrats (and many country club Republicans) in the New York, Connecticut and New Jersey tri-state area. He is liberal socially and culturally but moderate on economic issues. He was also an effective three term Mayor of New York and probably would be a formidable opponent in the general election. His first campaign ad touts his strong support for gun control and environmental issues, and promises that he will rebuild America. Bloomberg is focusing on Super Tuesday hoping to use his massive personal war chest to blanket the airwaves and compete effectively across 12 states including California. To the extent that he is successful, Bloomberg will most likely take votes away from Biden and Buttigieg.
However, Bloomberg will struggle to gain the support of the progressive wing and we doubt that he will win the nomination. At a rally in Portsmouth NH today, Sanders attacked Bloomberg by name. On Twitter, Sanders said, “We do not believe that billionaires have the right to buy elections. That is why multi-billionaires like Michael Bloomberg are not going to get very far in this election.” Sanders repeated his calls for a “revolution” as he threatened to put a target on Wall Street and the banks. Bloomberg is the personification of Wall Street and globalism. Sanders (and Warren) will fight a Bloomberg nomination all the way to the Convention. They grudgingly supported Hillary Clinton in 2016 believing that she would beat Donald Trump. This time, they will not easily accept Bloomberg. In fact, a Bloomberg candidacy could splinter the Democratic Party and give rise to a high profile Green Party run by Sanders or other progressive.
Warren is politically indistinguishable from Sanders, but she has not embraced the label of Democratic Socialism. She too has made banks and Wall Street the focus of her campaign. Today, she also used Twitter to indirectly attack Bloomberg noting that “big money creates corruption in politics.” Warren is also the only woman among the leading candidates.
So why do we believe that one of the Progressive candidates, Warren or Sanders, is more likely to win? First, Progressives have learned from the 2016 nominating process and have taken steps to control the slates of most state delegations that will come to the convention next June. Second, Warren and Sanders are being careful not to attack each other. If you combine their polling numbers, they control between 30-40% of the vote. At some point, one of the two is likely to pull out and endorse the other. This will be a potent voting bloc to contend with. Third, we think Warren has an edge as the only female among the leading Democratic candidates. A significant percentage of the Democratic Party wants a female candidate. A lot can change from now until the Convention, but for now our odds on the Democratic nomination are: (1) Warren (35%), (2) Sanders (20%), (3) Biden (20%), (4) Bloomberg (10%), (5) Buttigieg (5%) and (6) somebody else (10%).
NewEnglandPolitics.com 