hey Ricky - I saw that one coming as I was writing this comment! LOL

I admire your commitment to this theory!

@WilyRickWiles thanks man! It may not be Michelle but there will be someone much like her IMHO - none of the current crop of Communists will be nominated - admit that much Ricky. c'mon you can do it!

@iThink Nah. It will be Biden, Bernie, or Warren.

@WilyRickWiles Biden might not live long enough - Bernie is just ---well, too old too white, too vapid, almost as easily disoriented as Biden...and Fauxcohahntis is a proven liar not nearly as distasteful or as offensive as Hilary was but still not electable IMHO - I don't see anyone in that crowd who truly has any hope of defeating Trump - Michelle is a different story. Think scorched earth as for the Trump 2nd term chances vs her.

@iThink She wouldn't have any credibility with the base. It would be like handing the election to Trump.

@WilyRickWiles Are you talking about Michelle?!? The base will NEVER look beyond her demographic profile and the fact that she's married to Barry will "Trump" any and all reservations the base might otherwise have - "credibility"? seriously?

@iThink Dude... the leading candidates right now illustrate the different segments of the base really well. About a third are white professionals and they prefer a progressive like Warren. Another third are young and diverse and they prefer Bernie. The last third are old and diverse and they prefer whoever has the most name recognition or otherwise looks like a winner--they prefer Biden at the moment. That last group will support whoever the Dems run, but the Bernie voters and half of the Warren voters will stay home. They care about democracy and progressive issues.

Trump has right-wingers turning out to vote in record numbers--even in the midterms. Democrats won in the midterms because their larger base was even more engaged. While the DNC often makes dumb decisions, the kind of chicanery you describe would be suicidal. They can't afford to lose a chunk of the base.

@WilyRickWiles

Really Ricky - I truly believe Trump the man (as opposed to the POTUS) is not all that appealing to most "right wingers". They voted for Trump because in the primaries Trump was NOT a Bush, nor a "Romney/McCain" and he just did not pussy foot about with his language. In a convoluted way that almost seemed like a breath of fresh air - if you can imagine what it is like to be trying to get some air while standing within 100 yards of a goddam feed lot. That air is noxious - can and will make you sick over time...so sick had we been from the years of Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama and the seemingly deliberate losses of Romney and McCain that even the coarse and dim-witted Trump was a desirable alternative to what had become the status-quo.

In the General most "right wingers" voted for Trump because frankly Hillary scares the be-jesus out anyone who has been paying attention for the last 35 years or so.

Barring a Michelle O entering the race (no pun intended) for the Dems to have any hope of replacing Trump with their own candidate they are going to HAVE to present someone who is a LOT less Socialistic/Communistic Atheistic Anti-American than any of the current candidates.

Truthfully I personally would LOVE to at least have an optional or alternatively viable candidate to voting for Trump in the 2020 election.

The (formerly) Dem Partys' sudden lurch to the hard left is just too extreme - too much in too short a period of time - it is too much to ask of people who are old enough and well educated (in US and World History) enough to take such a change lying down.

Honest to God - I could not care less if a good alternative (and "good" is the operative word here) to Trump were Non-White and Female I would at the VERY least consider - seriously consider voting for that person. In fact I probably would do just that and I don't think I am anywhere close to being alone in that regard.

@iThink I stand by my assessment, but your reply has me curious from the perspective of understanding voting demographics.

I take it that people like you are looking first for someone who is an outsider and second for moderation on economic and social policy. So Trump the outsider beats the insider Clinton. And of course he beats an insider who is an economic moderate, like Biden or Harris, for the same reason. And if he's up against a fellow outsider who's more economically populist, like Bernie or Warren, he beats them for the economic reasons.

Is that right, and is it right to assume that Biden is perceived as an insider?

So I guess Michelle Obama is seen as an outsider because she has never held elective office. Of the people running, perhaps Buttigieg would have a shot at that lane due to his religious crossover appeal, short history in office, and military service.

Or perhaps you're making a distinction between such moderates and Michelle. Moderates win voters like you but Michelle has supercharged identity appeal that turns out so many Democrats that your vote is neutralized. That I reject completely for the reasons I already mentioned about the base.

I can kind of see where you're going on the moderation, but I think the moderate outsider is a unicorn. Anyone who postures as one is probably hiding allegiances to powerful interests. And I don't think their appeal is as deep as you imply. The electorate on average is economically left and socially right. In our two party system, Republicans are economically right for moral reasons and socially right by necessity. Likewise, Democrats are socially left for moral reasons and economically left by necessity. Voting for a moderate will just shift the Overton window that shapes the neoliberal consensus in favor of whichever party is in the majority. I think the perceived radicalism of Bernie and Warren is overblown and that they have the correct solutions. And imposing a candidate would demoralize the base.

I do think a political realignment is possible, but because of our two party system, it's likely to be in the form of Bannon (economically left and socially right) or Bernie (economically left and socially left), not Macron (economically moderate and socially moderate).

@WilyRickWiles

I take it that people like you are looking first for someone who is an outsider and second for moderation on economic and social policy.

Not necessarily an outsider - but I do tend to distrust "insiders" viscerally
As for moderation on economic and social policy I can't really answer that question because the parameters are too broad.

So Trump the outsider beats the insider Clinton.

Literally everybody beats Clinton - nuff said about that

And of course he beats an insider who is an economic moderate, like Biden

Biden is certainly a member of the staid professional Washington politician club who changes his stance on any matter without batting an eye - and he is clearly not a physically well man.

or Harris, for the same reason.

As for Harris She hasn't been in politics long enough (especially Washington Politics) to be an "insider" but I think you know the story of her corrupt ways. Also willing to pander (totally unprincipled on social and economic matters) to the ideas and people who are most likely to vote for her because of her demographic profile. In fact I don't believe anyone knows where Harris stands (she herself doesn't even know) - does she align with the Pelosi leadership or is she sympathetic to the "squad"? dunno don't care really because she (Harris) is more or less an outsider who hasn't really declared where she stands on most things. IMHO.

And if he's up against a fellow outsider who's more economically populist, like Bernie or Warren, he beats them for the economic reasons.

I think that's a fair statement

is it right to assume that Biden is perceived as an insider?

LOL - already answered that question but you know he is the quintessential Wash DC insider slimy and sleazy as they come. I guess Wash DC slime is just less desirable now than Trump slime...oh well...LOL

So I guess Michelle Obama is seen as an outsider

Michelle is no more of an outsider than Hillary was before she was handed the office of Dem Senator of New York. Hillary is corrupt through and through and is motivated purely by megalomania - not really a principled or dedicated ideologue.

Michelle is almost purely an ideologue - communist, hates USA and White people passionately. Nevertheless she would beat Trump like a drum if the Dems handed her the nomination...its that demographic thing and being married to the 1st black POTUS and she would be the 1st Female AND Black AND with her husband really out in front ...it would be a 3rd Obama term...the support for that would be nothing less than ground shaking.

Buttigieg would have a shot at that lane due to his religious crossover appeal, short history in office, and military service.

His military service does not do any harm - lets put it that way but I

Could NOT care less about any candidates religious leanings (except for islam which is absolutely incompatible with American basic values as lined out in the Bill of Rights...dictatorial theocracy is less desirable than socialism itself which is an extreme assertion not made lightly on my part.

I can kind of see where you're going, but I think the moderate outsider is a unicorn.

Maybe so And I don't think their appeal is as deep as you imply.

I think the electorate would leap on that unicorns back in a NY minute.

In our two party system, Republicans are economically right for moral reasons and socially right by necessity. Likewise, Democrats are socially left for moral reasons and economically left by necessity.

The electorate on average is economically left and socially right.

I disagree - I believe the electorate is generally self interested economically and doesn't really care about social issues as much as you think they do. Unless you count abortion as a social issue...the rest of it (LGBTQ...) there really aren't enough religious fundamentalists left to make a real difference in that trend anyhow. I dare say the religious fundamentalism crowd we all should be concerned about would be the Muslims.

I think Moral arguments are merely cudgels by which professional politicians abusively manipulate the electorate - they hammer on "moral issues" ad-infinitum hoping to inflame and motivate their bases during the election cycles. The electorate really just wants to have a decent job and to be left alone - live and let live generally speaking.

Voting for a moderate will just shift the Overton window that forms the neoliberal consensus in favor of whichever party is in the majority. I think the perceived radicalism of Bernie and Warren is overblown and that they have the correct solutions. And imposing a candidate would demoralize the base.

I disagree - on both counts. First hard socialism is much more UN popular that you apparently think it is and secondly it would depend upon who the DNC chooses to impose upon their electorate - If it's Michelle I would be wildly accepted - it would be the "Second Coming" (my apologies to WB Yeats) for the Dem base.

I do think a political realignment is possible, but because of our two party system, it's likely to be in the form of Bannon (economically left and socially right) or Bernie (economically left and socially left), not Macron (economically moderate and socially moderate).

I believe a political realignment is inevitable and will happen organically sooner or later and it will be more or less non-violent. Generally speaking the US population is far too fat and happy (as it were) to put up much of a fight over anything...as long as the power grid remains stable and we keep cool in summer and warm in winter and are able to keep driving our cars...etc the american people will "tolerate" almost anything rather than rocking the boat.

@iThink Seems like we're pretty much on the same page except from our personal politics and where we see the electorate differently. But what makes you think Michelle Obama is "communist, hates USA and White people passionately"? That's almost as outlandish as thinking that she's a transgender woman! Kind of reminds me of when the right got triggered by the rapper Common visiting White House. [theguardian.com] He's one of the post positive, tamest, and middle of the road rappers out there!