Democrats who can unite the Country

[Beet]

None, the US is so polarized that it's impossible for anyone to unite the country.  Basically the two sides are so far apart that no matter who becomes president a large chunk of the country will hate them.

This.  We have entered an era of intense polarization, and I fear it may only become worse.  Based on current trends, I suspect the US in 20 years will be hyper-polarized, with the parties in a South African type system (i.e., racial stratification by party- there will be the "White" party, and then the party for everyone else).  All debates will eventually lead back to identity politics.  There will be debates over other stuff, like economics and national security.. but they will be on the periphery.  Sorta like global warming now- sure, it comes up now and then, but no one really cares.  I have a projected long-term electoral map for this scenario here.

I suspect this will be the case, boomers or no boomers, because I think some of the trends driving polarization (e.g., geographical self-sorting, social media, 24/7 news cycle, tendency of media to sensationalize stories or add a racial lens, etc.), are not going away any time soon.

No one candidate can "unite the country."  Even JBE wouldn't be able to do it.  This is something that goes way beyond any one person's ability to fix.  And certainly not someone like Harris or Booker.  McGovernForPrez is right; if Obama couldn't, then they won't either.

What it will take is some catastrophic event to restore a sense of common purpose, national brotherhood, shared sacrifice, etc., that cuts across class and racial lines.  Maybe a severe depression would?  A war on the scale of WW2 probably would, where people are being drafted in the millions, and for a minute you're thinking just about survival.  Stuff like racial tensions aren't exactly on the mind when you're landing on the shores of Normandy trying not to get shot.

I'm not advocating for a war of that size, but just making an observation.  We would need something on that scale, truly society changing, to take us out of this "funk."

Of course, we don't need to de-polarize for the Dems to win again (and vise versa).  With the right candidate, Dems can just boost minority turnout in Detroit and FL, flip them and win in 2020.

Aren't you one of the ones advocating a nuclear war with North Korea? As much as I hate polarization, I'd prefer polarization to tens of millions of people dying, thanks. I've already said I'd rather the Republicans control things for 100 years than that.

Also, since no one will attack us, we'd have to start it, and I'd caution the risks of turning into Nazi Germany for the sake of uniting the country. The long term consequences of such a thing are not just gonna be a repeat of the fairy tale past.

[Beet]

We need a horrific crisis to unite this country. Think of the Great Depression/WWII, the Civil War (which ended with mixed results), or the Revolutionary War. It has to be something that shakes us so much to our core that we're forced to put our differences aside and come together. Nearly 3,000 Americans died on 9/11 and the polarization was only halted for a couple years then we went right back to our divided selves by 2004-2006. So a national crisis would have to shake us more than 9/11 did in order to bring us together.

As it stands, no Democrat can unite us. There's nothing they can do to rally the country together in the current circumstances.

No, we don't "need" a horrific crisis. Better one person die in Charlottesville than another 9/11. And don't forget that the country was not very polarized in the 1920s, except for a tiny segment left over from the Civil War. There isn't really any example of a crisis "healing" polarization. Usually one side totally wins and the other loses.

[Beet]

We can't even agree on reality or what a "fact" is for Christ's sake. How is one suppose to unite the country with a clear mandate absent a national crisis in this kind of environment? It does not happen.

I didn't say the Democrats would unite the country in 2020. I just said even a major crisis isn't likely to unite the country in that way. After all, look at the Civil War. It was a major crisis if there ever was one, one side had a decisive victory if there ever was one, yet.... here we are, still debating Confederate statues 150 years later.

The last very polarizing era in American politics was the 1960s. How did that end? Well, it just sort of fizzled out. The center retook control in the early 1970s and the radicals were ridiculed into oblivion. All that's needed is for centrism to reassert itself.

[Beet]

The GOP actually moved to the center in a lot of ways in 2016. They toned down their hawkishness, their religious conservatism, and their small-government ideology. In every area of policy, they moved to the center, and that is why they won. It was the classic Bill Clinton strategy.

The Democrats, on the other hand, rushed to the left, and this hurt them. It is true, in some ways, the Democratic program on the left is becoming more popular-- but this is mainly in the realm of economics. In the realm of social issues, it is not so. The SJW left must be relentlessly attacked and crushed, and if it is I don't see an internal conflict. The Democratic media establishment has been fanning the flames of identity politics for years, and bear the bulk of the blame for where we are today.