I think that Elizabeth Warren would be a great president. Her plans show insight; her accomplishments show persistence; her positive campaign shows maturity and balance; and her entire life story shows courage.
But after New Hampshire, there’s no denying that her chances of becoming president are narrowing. And yet, I’m more committed than ever to voting for her in the primary. Why?
Let’s look at how 538 projects this race after NH. (I don’t think these numbers are the be-all-and-end-all, but I think they’re within 5-10% of correct across the board.)
According to these numbers, the second-most-likely scenario is “no majority”. That is, no candidate gets at least 1990 of the 3979 pledged delegates; so, if nobody drops out, the vote goes to a second round, and about 700 superdelegates get to vote as well.
Chances are high that this would mean two things:
- Sanders would have a plurality of delegates, and thus Sanders voters would strongly believe him to be the only legitimate winner.
- Non-Sanders candidates would have a majority of delegates, and thus anti-Sanders voters would have a reasonable argument that he was NOT the legitimate winner.
This is, potentially, a recipe for division, recrimination, and possibly even electoral disaster in November. What would keep that disaster from happening? A compromise outcome, negotiated impartially by someone whom most people on both sides could trust. And Elizabeth Warren is clearly the most qualified to be that person, by far.
As for what that outcome would look like? Personally, my ideal in that situation would be a Sanders/Harris ticket, because it would project legitimacy and send clear messages to each key group that their issues were being taken seriously. But the point isn’t the outcome; the point is the negotiation.
So, even though I think that it’s a very long shot for Warren to win at this point, I still strongly believe she is the best candidate to support in the primary for the sake of the country and of the party.