Western candidate

[American2020]

Western Democrats are leading the front against Trump.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/western-democrats-trump-resistance-236223

Do you think a westerner could be president in 2020 ?

[Suburbia]

Maybe. Steve Bullock. Kamala Harris. Gavin Newsom.

Out of those three: Bullock.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

I think that there's a difference between a "Westerner" and a "Californian".

[NOVA Green]

I think that there's a difference between a "Westerner" and a "Californian".

Agreed...

The past three Democratic Presidential nominees have all been (Or heavily associated with large states/Metro areas)....

Even Obama, who spent most of his younger years in Hawaii and Kansas, was somehow tied to Chicago, to the point where Trump appears to have developed an obsession with an entire city! HRC might have spent some time in Arkansas, and has some deep family roots in smaller town NE-PA, was somehow considered to be more associated with New York and DC, and to a lesser extent Chicago.

John Kerry, although he performed better than Dem nominees in '08/'12/'16 in rural and small town America, still got tied to the "Mass Liberal stereotype".

Al Gore, was the last Democratic nominee that could claim street cred for being from a smaller state, with relatively small population centers.

Bill Clinton, "The Boy from Hope" (Arkansas) definitely got major street cred in small-town and rural America.

The Democratic Party needs a breath of fresh air, meaning a different style of political leader, who comes from somewhere in the West (Outside of California), who can tell their personal life story and progressive political positions in a manner which is considered outside the realm of the Beltway and establishment politics, big city machines, and all that....

I think a Westerner could actually perform quite well in places like the Industrial Midwest, and generally in those parts of small-town America.... Shoot, just look at how some little known Senator from Vermont was able to mount a credible challenge to HRC, and is currently polling better than Trump at the national level.

I'm not going to delve into the prediction game of whom that candidate might be, but definitely I strongly suspect we'll see a few Westerner's throw their hat into the ring in 2020, that don't come from the great state of California....

[Mr. Morden]

A related thing that is kind of remarkable is how few of the prospective Democratic candidates (and there are, what?  25 or 30 of them now?) have won major statewide office in any states won by Trump in this past election.  I guess Bullock is the most likely candidate who's won statewide in a Trump state.  Then you've got Sherrod Brown, who, despite probably being a reasonably strong candidate, actually has done next to nothing to indicate that he's interested (though it's possible he's just biding his time until his 2018 reelection).

And that's pretty much it.  Castro is from Texas, but he hasn't won statewide.  Those who have won statewide, and who've done something to indicate interest in 2020, come from states such as Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Virginia, etc.

[Bakersfield Uber Alles]

Say it with me:

Martin Trevor Heinrich

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Is there any particular reason why Inslee isn't ever seriously considered on this board or by prognosticators? Is it a low profile? A natural preference of the modern Democratic Party for Senate candidates? Bullock is a good candidate for a GE, don't get me wrong. But why doesn't Inslee get the same level of recognition?

[McGovernForPrez]

Is there any particular reason why Inslee isn't ever seriously considered on this board or by prognosticators? Is it a low profile? A natural preference of the modern Democratic Party for Senate candidates? Bullock is a good candidate for a GE, don't get me wrong. But why doesn't Inslee get the same level of recognition?

I'd say there are two reasons. Unlike Bullock he's not the Governor of a red state. He's in charge of a coastal blue state so he gets less cred for being able to win over GOP voters. Also he's much more associated with the Clinton's and the new Democrats so I think that hurts him. Democrats should be eyeing someone who's a bit of a party outsider if they plan on beating Trump.

[MAINEiac4434]

Say it with me:

Martin Trevor Heinrich

Way too close to the center for the Bernie wing. So is Bullock.

[McGovernForPrez]

Say it with me:

Martin Trevor Heinrich

Way too close to the center for the Bernie wing. So is Bullock.

I can't speak for Heinrich but Bullock has already earned himself some progressive streed cred when he fought against Citizens United as Montana Attorney General. As governor he really hasn't spoken about many national issues. He's free to position himself however he wants for a primary run, and his history of fighting against money in politics will go a long way with the Bernie faction.

[TDAS04]

If he had been reelected to the Senate, I might have said Mark Udall.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Say it with me:

Martin Trevor Heinrich

Way too close to the center for the Bernie wing. So is Bullock.

I can't speak for Heinrich but Bullock has already earned himself some progressive streed cred when he fought against Citizens United as Montana Attorney General. As governor he really hasn't spoken about many national issues. He's free to position himself however he wants for a primary run, and his history of fighting against money in politics will go a long way with the Bernie faction.

He also helped push through the Medicaid expansion in Montana. That could play well with a national audience.

[Mr. Morden]

Is there any particular reason why Inslee isn't ever seriously considered on this board or by prognosticators? Is it a low profile? A natural preference of the modern Democratic Party for Senate candidates? Bullock is a good candidate for a GE, don't get me wrong. But why doesn't Inslee get the same level of recognition?

“Presidential buzz” usually doesn’t materialize out of thin air.  (In most cases anyway) it’s not something that’s imposed on the candidate from the outside.  Rather, a candidate’s name gets dropped because he/she wants it to be dropped.  In Bullock’s case, he attended that David Brock-hosted event for big $ fundraisers in Florida earlier this year, and he’s also on the schedule for CAP’s Ideas Conference in May, which’ll feature a bunch of other people positioning themselves for 2020 (e.g., Booker, Gillibrand, Warren…).  The latter event in particular sounds like an indication of interest.  Not sure that Inslee has done anything comparable yet, though if he ends up going to the Ideas Conference as well, that would certainly count as an indication of interest.

[America Needs R'hllor]

Is there any particular reason why Inslee isn't ever seriously considered on this board or by prognosticators? Is it a low profile? A natural preference of the modern Democratic Party for Senate candidates? Bullock is a good candidate for a GE, don't get me wrong. But why doesn't Inslee get the same level of recognition?

“Presidential buzz” usually doesn’t materialize out of thin air.  (In most cases anyway) it’s not something that’s imposed on the candidate from the outside.  Rather, a candidate’s name gets dropped because he/she wants it to be dropped.  In Bullock’s case, he attended that David Brock-hosted event for big $ fundraisers in Florida earlier this year, and he’s also on the schedule for CAP’s Ideas Conference in May, which’ll feature a bunch of other people positioning themselves for 2020 (e.g., Booker, Gillibrand, Warren…).  The latter event in particular sounds like an indication of interest.  Not sure that Inslee has done anything comparable yet, though if he ends up going to the Ideas Conference as well, that would certainly count as an indication of interest.

This, though in some cases it seems like some buzz is imposed on candidates simply because they're from a unique demographic (eg Tammy Baldwin, Kamala Harris) or just by their general uniqueness and competence (Franken comes to mind).

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Is there any particular reason why Inslee isn't ever seriously considered on this board or by prognosticators? Is it a low profile? A natural preference of the modern Democratic Party for Senate candidates? Bullock is a good candidate for a GE, don't get me wrong. But why doesn't Inslee get the same level of recognition?

“Presidential buzz” usually doesn’t materialize out of thin air.  (In most cases anyway) it’s not something that’s imposed on the candidate from the outside.  Rather, a candidate’s name gets dropped because he/she wants it to be dropped.  In Bullock’s case, he attended that David Brock-hosted event for big $ fundraisers in Florida earlier this year, and he’s also on the schedule for CAP’s Ideas Conference in May, which’ll feature a bunch of other people positioning themselves for 2020 (e.g., Booker, Gillibrand, Warren…).  The latter event in particular sounds like an indication of interest.  Not sure that Inslee has done anything comparable yet, though if he ends up going to the Ideas Conference as well, that would certainly count as an indication of interest.

This, though in some cases it seems like some buzz is imposed on candidates simply because they're from a unique demographic (eg Tammy Baldwin, Kamala Harris) or just by their general uniqueness and competence (Franken comes to mind).

Thank you both for the explanation - quite helpful for context. Seems like a national profile is something that's a prerequisite for the buzz imposed scenario that you describe, something that Inslee has not yet attained.

[Kingpoleon]

No Democratic nominee I recall has been from west of Minnesota except LBJ, Bryan, and McGovern.