Bloomberg and the Democratic Primary

Earlier this month, former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg filed paperwork to officially join the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. While his candidacy (as of this writing) is by no means certain since he has not officially confirmed that he is running, the step of filing has garnered enough attention to boost his chances of being nominated to run against President Trump. Some, however, aren’t taking it seriously, largely because Bloomberg declared in March of this year that he would not seek the nomination, and only filed the paperwork the day after Trump said: “There is nobody I'd rather run against than ‘Little Michael.’ ” (Others feel that perhaps it was more a response to Trump’s earlier comment that Bloomberg "doesn't have the magic" to win the election.)

Realistically, the filing of paperwork only means he’s keeping his options open. Given how relatively late we are in the election cycle, especially considering that in the last 43 years, the latest any eventual nominee entered the race was August, Bloomberg’s campaign would have to be incredibly swift and efficient in order to establish enough of a presence to make the debate stage, let alone actually have a chance at winning the nomination. His candidacy would, however, shake up the Democratic primary in a couple of ways. 

The first one is fundraising, the main concern after actually winning enough votes. It is certainly less of an issue for Bloomberg than for other candidates, since his net worth is $53 billion and he has already pledged $500 million to unseat Trump regardless of who the nominee is, $175 million more than the Trump campaign spent in 2016. His ability to spend huge amounts in the primaries too could complicate things for his competitors. Then, of course, there are the differences in his positions. Bloomberg has stated his belief that the nominee must be able to defeat Trump. Given that he has disparaged Elizabeth Warren’s proposed wealth tax as socialism and that Joe Biden, who is closer to him on such issues, continues to have difficulty with fundraising, a Bloomberg candidacy may be viable if it’s launched now. Bloomberg, Biden, and perhaps Pete Buttigieg are theoretically aiming to be the centrist alternative to the more liberal candidates. Most of the support for a Bloomberg campaign will most likely emerge from people who now favor Biden and Buttigieg. If moderates are more capable than progressives in beating Trump, such a split among more moderate voters could give Warren just enough of an advantage to win the nomination--and then potentially lose to Trump. If Bloomberg’s purpose in running is to ensure that the candidate most capable of taking down Trump will get the nomination, then the general election might truly be over before it begins.

A Failed Impeachment and the 2020 Election

As the 2020 election approaches, the recently announced impeachment inquiry has sparked new commentary and speculation on both sides. With the feasibility of ousting the president unclear, it seems likely that we will be pulled into a drawn-out spectacle around impeachment. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has received criticism from within her party for describing impeachment as impractical and favoring a win at the ballot box, despite believing that President Trump should be impeached. At this point, it seems unlikely that Trump would be found guilty in a Senate trial and forced from office, since 67 votes are required and there are only 47 Democrats (counting two independents who consistently vote with Democrats) in the Senate. It appears unlikely that enough Republicans would cross the aisle and vote to convict the president. If we assume that to be true, the potential outfall from a failed impeachment has the ability to drastically affect the 2020 election in one of several ways. 

The initial and perhaps most obvious result would be further damage to the president’s reputation—which frankly does not matter, since many of his critics believe he should have been impeached from the day he was elected and since those who support him will continue to do so (they have made it clear that no amount of investigation into claims against Trump would affect their vote for his re-election). Beyond damage to his reputation, some have theorized that an impeachment would force junior Democrats from “purple” states to run the risk of angering their constituents, many of whom are far more politically centrist than the fact they have a Democratic representative or senator would suggest. A Quinnipiac University poll released on September 30 found that 47 percent of Americans still oppose impeachment and removal, although 57 percent of Americans disapprove or at least don’t approve of Trump’s results as president according to RealClearPolitics. Trump’s approval rating has been a much lower 43 percent, according to RealClearPolitics. This means there’s a segment of the voter population that, despite not supporting Trump or his policies, still disagrees with his removal from office. In the 2018 congressional election, more freshman Democrats were elected than the country has seen in over 40 years, and with some of these younger politicians hailing from states with a large percentage of conservatives who voted for Trump, their support of the impeachment inquiry could signal to many constituents that their elected officials aren’t representing or fulfilling the opinions and desires of the public. This would feed right into Trump’s rhetorical claims that the impeachment process is a coup designed by Democrats who don’t see a way to beat him in the 2020 election.

Regardless of the outcome of an impeachment drive, its ripples will surely affect politics for years to come, and the possible unintended consequences have the potential to shift the course of American history.