There Can Be Only One .... Litmus Test

 The friends of Tapper are doing their best to promote his book, even suggesting that the Dems will be evaluated in 2028 based on where they stand on Biden's health during the latter stages of his term.  If only those folks were not so self-interested and perhaps read a smidge of political science, they might not say something so outrageously stupid.  So, first, why this ain't going to be the litmus test and then what will be the litmus test for the Democratic nomination fight in 2028 (if we have free and fair elections*).

What do we know from social science? 

• Voters have short memories.  Did Trump's first term crimes and failures sink his 2024 election run? Nope.  Lots of reasons for that, but partly because people (voters and those who chose not to vote) either forgot how bad it was or discounted because we tend to discount that which is not in our immediate present (we discount both the past and the future).
• Scandals of non-candidates do not matter.  If this is a scandal at all, it is Biden's, and I am pretty sure he isn't running in 2028.  Sure, the media will ask each Democratic nominee about what they thought about Biden four years earlier, but the smart pols can dodge pretty easily.  If this matters at all, it won't hurt the governors or Congresspeople in the race, just those serving in the Biden Administration (Harris, Buttigieg).  
  
• Primaries matter a great deal.  Some might even say they select the nominee.  Are Dems going to outbid each other on who was quickest to realize that Biden was declining and did something about it?  Oh wait, nobody but Pelosi did much about this, and I am pretty sure she isn't running either.  

Speaking of outbidding, what will Dems outbid each other on in 2028?  How about resisting/fighting Trump and his team of far right arsonists?  Remember how much juice Cory Booker got for filibustering for over a day?  Oh wait, the same Cory Booker just voted to confirm the Ambassador appointment of Jared Kushner's dad. You know, the guy who was corrupt AF and even hired a prostitute to set up his brother-in-law.  So, Booker, in one incredibly dumb move, destroyed whatever cred he had.

I don't know who will win (I am bad at predicting outcomes), but I can guarantee you that the focus of the competition will be on who did the most to block the worst that Trump was doing.  Think back to the big nomination battles of yore:

• 1992: many of the Dems who might have run were constrained by voting against the Gulf War, leaving a field wide open for a guy who couldn't take that stand since he was not in the Senate at the time (that would be Bill Clinton for the youngsters, an important Semi-Spew demographic**).
• 2008: the key litmus test was who voted for the invasion of Iraq, helping Obama defeat Hillary.
• 2020: the outbidding was mostly on health care, but the key litmus test ended up being who was thought to have the best chance of defeating Trump.

A reminder to all the pundits: the folks who vote in primaries are not the centrists, but the extremes.  For Trump in 2016, that meant the racists, the misogynists, the xenophobes.  For the Dems in 2028, it will certainly mean the people most aggrieved by the harm committed by the Trump administration.  They will turn out the most as they will be the most passionate.  And they will not be voting for the folks who tried to work with Trump.  As much as the media likes for Dems to bend the knee (the Republicans are never really pushed to be bipartisan), the Dem primary voters will cut any such compromiser off at the knees.  Newsom is already a dead candidate walking.  Whitmer is on the edge.  Booker may survive this week's vote because confirming incredibly corrupt ambassador picks may not get much heat.  Who has got the heat now?  AOC, Buttigieg, Walz, and Pritzker.  Why?  Because they are speaking out against Trump and his band of autocratic criminals.  They aren't making any deals.  The good news for three of them, like Obama and Clinton before them, won't be in any position to cast votes for Trump's appointments or policies.  And I am pretty sure AOC won't be voting for any such stuff either.

Watch the elections in 2025 and see what the politicians do and who is rewarded for trying to work with Trump (no one) and who is rewarded for opposing him?  We have already seen some elections in the US (and a heap across the world) where those opposing Trump the most win.  Expect more of the same and expect the pols to learn from this.

So scoff at those who say anything else, including a Biden-focused issue, will be a litmus test.  There can be only one, and this ain't it.

 

 *  For those who think things will be swell, note that Trump's weaponized DoJ has started charging Democratic politicians with crimes.  My only surprise is that AOC was not first.   

** I am pretty sure the youths are not reading this.  If it were on tik tok, maybe.