IF WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT WEST WING FANTASIES, HERE'S MINE (with a Biden-withdrawal postscript)

The editors of the New York Times opinion section are undoubtedly aware that many Democrats regard the various replace-Joe-Biden scenarios as "West Wing fantasies," so they decided to troll these Democrats by commissioning Aaron Sorkin to devise a resolution for the party's current crisis, in the manner of the West Wing scripts he used to write. You can probably guess what Sorkin proposes:

... there’s something the Democrats can do that would not just put a lump in people’s throats with its appeal to stop-Donald-Trump-at-all-costs unity, but with its originality and sense of sacrifice. So here’s my pitch to the writers’ room: The Democratic Party should pick a Republican.

At their convention next month, the Democrats should nominate Mitt Romney.

Of course.

Sorkin knows that Romney doesn't support any of the policies that matter most to Democratic voters:

Does Mr. Romney support abortion rights? No. Does he want to aggressively raise the minimum wage, bolster public education, strengthen unions, expand transgender rights and enact progressive tax reform? Probably not.

Would Aaron Sorkin personally benefit from any of these policies? Of course not. So he doesn't care, and, because he's a narcissist like most successful people in this society, he thinks rank-and-file voters don't care about anything he doesn't care about.

Sorkin writes:

But is [Romney] a cartoon thug who did nothing but watch TV while the mob he assembled beat and used Tasers on police officers? No. The choice is between Donald Trump and not-Trump, and the not-Trump candidate needs only one qualification: to win enough votes from a cross section of Americans to close off the former president’s Electoral College path back to power.

Democrats have overperformed in off-year elections since the Dobbs decision, Democrats running in close Senate races are outpolling their Republican opponents, Democrats -- as Sorkin himself notes later in the piece -- have won the popular vote in seven of the past eight presidential elections, and yet his idea of a candidate who can "win enough votes from a cross section of Americans" is, naturally, a Republican. And not only a Republican, but a Republican who's run for president twice and lost both times.

Which is not to say that Republicans are entirely useless. I'll get grief for this from "burn the lifeboats" Democrats, but let me present you with my best-received post at Bluesky:

I know I'm supposed to hate the Never Trumpers for their past sins, but people like Rick Wilson, Michael Steele, and now David Frum think Democrats could win this race. Imagine if a few actual Democratic operatives and pundits felt that way. (Gift link.) www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc...

[image or embed]

— Steve M. (@stevemnomoremister.bsky.social) Jul 19, 2024 at 1:35 PM

My West Wing fantasy isn't that Democrats pick a Republican candidate -- it's Democrats hiring some Republican operatives. Not for the policies, or the morally dubious tactics -- it's clear that Democrats need an infusion of people who don't hate themselves. When things go wrong in the GOP, Republicans don't decide that the public hates their party, and they certainly don't go running to every A-list reporter they know and say, "Wow, our party really blows, doesn't it?" They don't incessantly apologize for who they are. They don't engage in circular firing squads.

In my West Wing fantasy -- I hope this is gee-whizzy enough for Aaron Sorkin -- the Democratic presidential campaign hires a young operative who's concealing the fact that much of her past experience was working for Republicans. When her background is discovered, her bosses decide to fire her. Then she says something like this:

I know that what I did was completely unprofessional, but I just want to say one thing:

You need people like me.

Do you know what I learned when I was working for the other party? I learned that you don't win if you hate the people on your own side. I learned that when things are going right, you go on offense, and when things are going wrong, you go on offense. Here's what I never learned: I never learned that it was a good idea to tell a high-level reporter that your candidate is bad. I never learned that it was a good idea to criticize your own party's policies. I never learned those things, and because Republicans don't do those things, they win elections they shouldn't win. They win even though most Americans think they're wrong on abortion and wrong on guns and wrong on how much you should tax rich people. They won in 2016 with an ignorant, congenitally lying criminal and sex addict at the top of the ticket.

You can win with a flawed candidate if your people just shut the hell up and all row in the same direction. That's a lesson this party needs to learn.

That's my fantasy. Sadly, I think Democrats are more likely to actually put a Republican at the top of the ticket than they are to learn -- from disaffected Republicans or, even better, from people on their own side -- that they should not criticize their party publicly, should not undermine their nominee publicly, and should resolve internal fights swiftly and privately while focusing on promoting Democratic policies and criticizing Republican extremism. Couldn't there be a Democratic Party like this? Or is that just a fantasy?

*****

POSTSCRIPT: Well, this one was overtaken by events almost immediately -- President Biden has withdrawn from the race (but won't resign as president -- and he shouldn't). He subsequently endorsed Kamala Harris as the replacement candidate.

Republicans would know what to do in this situation: They'd rally around Harris and talk her up as an amazing candidate. Will Democrats do that? Or will some demand an open convention, while others grumble about whatever process is used to make the transition? I assume the latter, sadly. We'll see.