Beto for president

Peter Warski
Peter Warski
Published in
6 min readNov 17, 2018

--

The first snowfall of the season took place this past week in Washington, D.C. In its wake, Beto O’Rourke posted a blog entry about going for a run on the National Mall as the flakes flew. You should take a moment to read it. Typos aside, he really is a good, inspiring writer.

I was a little disappointed, though — if I had known he was going for a run over to the Lincoln Memorial on a snowy morning, I’d have gotten up early to join him. That is not something I’d otherwise be willing to do under any circumstances.

But seriously — this guy does not write with the tone of someone who is done with politics. Far from it. To the contrary, dare I say, he sounds a bit like the voice of a state senator from Illinois whose unusual name was almost completely unknown until he vaulted onto the national stage seemingly overnight and ultimately went on to serve two terms as a popular and historically significant president.

I could see Beto doing something very similar. And he absolutely should try.

For starters, I’ve been terribly remiss in highlighting the spectacular success of Beto’s senatorial campaign this fall in Texas. How can I call it successful when he lost to a weasel like Ted Cruz, you ask? Well, for starters, it’s Texas. Not only that, but he lost by less than three points. When you’re a Democrat running on an unapologetically progressive platform in Texas, including gun control and universal health care, and you come that close to unseating an incumbent Republican — then, yes, your campaign was a spectacular success. There’s really no other way to describe it.

I’m not saying Beto could carry Texas if he ran for president (though he’d be guaranteed to win if he did). He wouldn’t even need to, and even if he kept it close like he managed to do with this Senate race, that would be more than good enough to win states that he would need.

What I am saying is that Beto meets the needs and mitigates the liabilities Democrats have going into 2020. Here is Doug Sosnik, White House adviser to President Bill Clinton, articulating the biggest handicaps for Team Blue going into the next presidential election campaign season:

“There is no obvious candidate or even close to an obvious candidate. That’s a huge problem.”

“It will not, even under the best of circumstances, be easy to take on candidate Trump. He relishes the fights.”

“The Democrats cannot, under any circumstances, allow the anti-Trump vote to splinter, which could enable Trump to get re-elected despite a majority of Americans opposing his presidency.”

Let me tackle those one by one as they relate to Beto:

  • No obvious candidate: Beto O’Rourke is now a household name for staunch progressives and mainstream Democratic voters alike. If he’s not “obvious” now, he would immediately become so if would simply stop being so coy about his plans. I say “coy” because he previously stated unequivocally that he would not run for president in 2020. Now he’s reportedly saying that he hasn’t “made any decisions about anything.” That’s a movement in the right direction, isn’t it? And who else might compete with him for the Democratic nomination? Kamala Harris? Cory Booker? Julian Castro? Joe Biden? I’m sorry—he’s far more “obvious” than any of them. And he could school them all in the primaries.
  • Not easy to take on Trump: This one is laughably straightforward. Picture a young, attractive, charismatic, personable, empathetic candidate who isn’t afraid to drop the f-bomb on camera, on stage with an overweight, flabby, corrupt, combative, loud-mouthed, spray-tanned, leathery-skinned, decaying narcissist. Sure, I’m talking solely about image, but let’s face it—image is what matters more than almost anything else in political campaigns, for better or worse, and the comparison between the two would be absolutely devastating…to Trump. (Assuming, of course, that Trump is still even in office then, or that he decides to run for a second term. If he isn’t, or doesn’t, then who runs in his place against Beto? Mike Pence? Hahahahaha.)
  • Democratic vote splintering: It wouldn’t happen if Beto were the nominee. The Democrats’ problem in 2016 was threefold: their nominee wasn’t popular among the general electorate, they faced a vocal and not-insignificant “Bernie or Bust” contingent, and lots of their base voters didn’t bother to vote that year for either or both of the aforementioned reasons. Beto won’t face any of those problems in 2020: He’s popular, he aligns ideologically with Bernie voters, and he gets people to show up. For this reason, the Democratic vote won’t splinter, and as long as it doesn’t, Beto wins.

It’s true — if Beto doesn’t run, the Democratic Party has a serious problem going into 2020. Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden are old and stale faces. Elizabeth Warren would be a lousy candidate. Kamala Harris and Cory Booker just aren’t terribly exciting; if they were, either or both of them would stand out already. Neither really does. Julian Castro is mostly unknown to those who don’t pay attention to politics, presumably for the same reason. Michael Bloomberg? He would just look like an opportunist who’s running for president because he has a shit-ton of money. Because he is, and he does.

Hillary Clinton again? Just stop.

Beto, on the other hand: Well, for starters, I’m calling him by his first name. (Actually, Beto is not even his real first name; it’s a nickname.) I’m sorry; I know some people don’t like that. But when he records campaign videos like this one, I feel like he’s having a conversation with me personally — like I’m driving to Houston with him, listening to kick-ass road trip tunes with him — and it would be just inappropriate for me to call him “Representative O’Rourke”:

This guy obviously knows how to connect with an audience.

And if he were to run for president: Picture stadiums packed with young people who are thrilled just to get a look at the guy, just like they were with Barack Obama in 2007 and 2008. Picture the Democratic base turning out en masse in critical states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Picture states like Iowa, Ohio, and Florida back in play because dormant, on-the-fence, Obama-Trump, and “would have voted for Bernie but not Hillary” voters have new incentive to vote Democratic. Picture down-ballot energy for Democrats because of the candidate who’s at the top. Picture a nominee who takes not a penny from PACs and yet can compete in a ruby-red state like Texas while unabashedly advocating for equality and the environment.

Do you think Joe Biden could achieve all of those things?

Along those lines, an important disclaimer before I close: I love what Beto stands for ideologically, but at the same time, I make no proclamations or predictions about what kind of president he’d be. I simply don’t know that. I also realize that much of my endorsement of Beto stems from his image — his youthful, Kennedyesque appeal, his salt-of-the-earth Texas charm. Normally, it would be insanely foolish to gauge a politician’s value based on how he presents himself. But you have to understand my motivations here, both of which are straightforward, and either of which might be thoroughly uninspiring if not for the chapter of history in which we find ourselves:

  • Donald Trump needs to be ousted. Now.
  • The putrefying Republican Party needs to be locked out of the White House until it’s buried and reborn as an entirely new entity.

Beyond that, as the saying goes: Que Sera, Sera.

Beto stands for the right things. His heart appears to be in the right place. He would never run a perfect campaign; no one does. He’s got some baggage; everyone does. But he’s shown he can compete in the places where he needs to be competitive in order to win, and he is, by light years, the best choice Democrats have for president in 2020 — should he make that choice himself.

Oh, did I mention he’s fluent in Spanish? That can’t hurt.

Here’s hoping that he does. Here’s hoping that his blog post about running was a metaphor for something greater.

--

--