Last night MSNBC’s Chris Hayes made a very salient point (not an unusual happening): The Democratic Party has shifted dramatically to the Left since the 1990s and even since the election of Pres. Obama in 2008. On matters of social justice (race, sex, gender identity, sexual expression, civil liberties, criminal justice reform), the party’s center of gravity may be more liberal than ever. On matters of economic justice, the party is clearly reclaiming its New Deal and Great Society pasts and may be even preparing to go beyond them. Only in matters of war and peace is the party’s center of gravity still divided and it is also recovering from the shock of 9/11 that affected every American.
Because of this shift, all the announced and probable candidates will have to explain parts of their past on the campaign trail. If Joe Biden runs, he’ll have the advantage of the public having seen his evolution on the public stage for much of the Obama presidency, especially on LGBT matters (where he evolved faster than Obama). But despite his role in the passage of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and subsequent actions for sex and gender equality, the #MeToo era is likely to mean that Biden will be questioned strenuously over his handling of the Clarence Thomas SCOTUS confirmation hearings and the treatment of Prof. Anita Hill, the decision not to hear from other accusers, etc. Biden’s role in crafting the Crime Bills of the 1990s is also likely to come under scrutiny should he run.
Bernie Sanders is already needing to explain sexism and sexual harassment on his 2016 campaign and he hasn’t even announced a decision on 2018. I think his pro-gun stances will get more heat than they did in 2016.
Corey Booker will doubtless have to explain his close ties to Wall Street and even his defense of Bain Capital (against Obama’s strategy of tying Romney firmly to its abuses) in the election of 2012.
Of the announced candidates, Warren will be pushed as to her recent vote for the Trump military budget and to connect both her domestic and foreign policy to marginalized communities. It shouldn’t, in my opinion, but her DNA strategy to defend her family identity (and belief in some Native American ancestry) will keep being flung at her.
Gillibrand will pushed on her work as a defense attorney for Big Tobacco as well as her anti-immigration and pro-gun views in the 2 years she was a Blue Dog Democrat representing a conservative district in upstate New York. She has apologized and openly admitted being wrong in both these latter cases, but I seriously doubt she’s heard the last of those questions.
Tulsi Gabbard is being pressed on her long history of anti-LGBT and anti-choice activism as well as her continuing ties to authoritarian leaders abroad and the way some Trumpists (including Steve Bannon) like her so much.
Kamala Harris’ career as a prosecutor is under the spotlight, with arguments about whether or not she was a progressive prosecutor who worked for social justice then.
We won’t have any perfect candidates. All these questions are fair about each of these (and other potential) candidates. The primaries will be partly about who is better able to convince primary voters of the sincerity of their evolution (versus opportunism). The general election will, in part, test whether the Democratic nominee is able to push the Overton Window to the left and bring centrists along with her or him.
We will debate these things fiercely in this forum as Kossites always do. That’s healthy. But let’s remember, folks: There are no pure candidates (or voters). Whomever we pick will have imperfections. We may have criticisms of our nominee and think he or she needs to be pushed further in area 1 or area 2. But whomever we pick will doubtless be a huge contrast with either Trump, Pence or whatever GOPer is there in 2020. Because as our Party is becoming more progressive, the Republicans are getting WORSE. Keep that in mind and let’s be civil and gentle with each other and open to mutual correction by others and repentance where we need it (whether or not we are religious).