TRUMP AS FORMER PRESIDENT: A DISCORDANT OUTLIER

Over the 245 years of the American republic, the people of the United States have come to expect certain behavior from former presidents. As with every other aspect of his association with the presidency, Donald Trump now flaunts those expectations. His conduct looks especially egregious when compared with his real peers, other one-term presidents. No matter how long his predecessors served, however, Trump looks like an aberration. 

During our lifetimes, the United States has had three one-term presidents, chief executives who got elected, served one four-year term, stood for re-election, and lost. This definition, therefore, does

not include John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Gerald Ford. Kennedy won one-term and was assassinated. Johnson finished Kennedy’s term, won one of his own, but didn’t seek re-election. Ford succeeded Richard Nixon after his resignation, but lost the 1976 election. 

The presidents who fit our definition come from both parties – Democrat Jimmy Carter (1977-81) and Republicans George H. W. Bush (1989-93) and Trump (2017-21). The similarity in conduct between Carter and Bush, as one-term former presidents, when juxtaposed with that of Trump, provides more evidence of 45’s decadence.

The Former President Model

Our constitution says nothing about the “role” of a

former president. We established the  conventions and traditions by example. The nation’s first president, George Washington, served two terms and didn’t run again mainly because he worried about doing anything that resembled a monarchy.

 

The colonists fought a bitter war for independence from a tyrannical king. Washington wanted nothing that suggested the new country was installing something similar. 

The two-term maximum continued as an informal limit on presidential tenure until Franklin Roosevelt won four terms, prompting the 22nd amendment that made the two-term limit law.  The country has

had 13 two-term presidents, along with some who got reelected but couldn’t finish their terms for reasons like assassination or scandal (Abraham Lincoln, Nixon). We’ve had eight one-term presidents under our definition.  There’s also the strange case of Grover Cleveland who was elected in 1884, lost in 1888, then regained the office in 1892 and served out that four-year term.

By and large former presidents, whether they served one term or two, have assumed a senior statesman role. Generally, they’ve left themselves out of the country’s day-to-day political machinations.

 

James Earl Carter, Jr. and George H.W. Bush

Jimmy Carter and the first Bush weren’t much alike as presidents. In truth, they weren’t all that alike as former presidents except in ways that speak volumes about how they conceive of the

presidency. Carter devoted himself to good  works – helping Habitat for Humanity, promoting election reform in the third world, fighting poverty, etc.  The first President Bush spent more time doing things people do when they’re retired, though he took on humanitarian relief projects at the behest of his son, President George W. Bush. These included joining in 2005 with the man who defeated him, Bill Clinton, in raising money for tsunami victims.   

If Carter and Bush did some things differently in their post-presidential lives, they also did some important things alike. Neither injected himself into politics much beyond benign activities like speaking at his party’s convention and receiving the party’s nominee during the fall campaign. Both honored the office they held by quietly counseling their successors when asked and behaving as if their election hadn’t anointed them with a divine right to influence and manage the political process though they no longer occupied the oval office.

Trump’s Mischief

Since landing at Mara Largo on January 20 this year, Trump has remained a loud political  presence. Though social  media companies banned

him for distorted, untrue statements on their platforms, at rallies, through press releases, and in interviews on friendly outlets like Fox News, Trump infects our politics on a daily basis. He retains the loyalty of millions. He keeps raising money for future campaigns and, no doubt, his own use, including his mounting legal bills. He blesses favored candidates and meddles in Republican politics nationwide.

In some states, winning a Republican primary requires Trump’s endorsement. Even established GOP leaders will bow to his wishes because they so fear being out of favor with his voters. Recently, he pressured Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Trump sycophant now faced with dropping poll numbers in his state, into ordering an “audit” of Democratic-leaning counties, even though Trump carried Texas in 2020 by 630,000 votes. No one could imagine Carter or H.W. Bush doing such a thing.

Trump, of course, keeps hinting he’ll run again in 2024. Some people who know him think he can’t resist, while others believe he won’t because he can’t stand the prospect of another defeat. He did, however, recently hold a rally in Iowa, a key early state on the 2024 primary calendar.

We know Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, both two-term presidents who can’t run again

themselves, have campaigned for Democratic nominees who wanted to follow them into the oval office. Obama, particularly, helps Democrats raise money,

partly through direct mail solicitation of small donors.  But neither has muddied the water like Trump (nor has Trump’s fellow Republican, two-termer  George W. Bush). Neither has thumbed his nose at the expectation former presidents will maintain a sense of decorum and behave as protectors of the instruments and traditions of democracy.

The American presidency was never intended as a repository for unfettered political ambition or as a mere vessel for accumulating power its holder could dispense in service of those ambitions. By tradition and experience, the nation established norms for former holders of the job that honor the limits we put on the office itself. Trump has disregarded those, just as he flaunted so many norms while he was president.  The country should call out his behavior.  We just did our part.     

    

REPUBLICANS V. DEMOCRATS: A MATTER OF CELEBRITY

 

Both major political parties are lining up candidates

for next year’s elections. Anyone who made a political contribution during 2020 has probably been inundated with fundraising letters, e-mails, and text messages from 2022 campaigns.  We see a defining difference between the kinds of candidates emerging for Republicans and Democrats. Republicans very often present celebrities.

Democrats more often offer independent-minded candidates with roots in social and community movements. We find the difference fascinating.

Many states have spring filing deadlines and potential candidates continue making decisions about whether they’ll seek office. But, fundraising and campaign infrastructure require time. The clock is ticking, especially for high profile statewide races.

The Tuberville Model

Tommy Tuberville enjoyed a successful career as a college football coach, including at Auburn. Now

thanks to the celebrity that went along with that, Alabama’s inherent red hue, and Tuberville’s allegiance to Donald Trump, he’s a United States Senator. Tuberville brought no political or governing experience to his 2020 race against Democratic incumbent Doug Jones.  He campaigned carefully and said little about any issue. Tuberville’s case rested on the fact he’s a Republican (and, therefore, not a Democrat), he enjoyed Trump’s support, and name recognition from coaching. We aren’t saying he wasn’t qualified, but he never said much about what his qualifications were.  He spoke in generalities,

espousing well-worn right wing talking points. His record to date reflects little except following directions from Trump and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.      

That strategy – sports-based celebrity, support of

and from Trump, and keeping quiet beyond platitudes – rests at the heart of legendary running back Herschel’s Walker’s bid for the U.S. Senate in Georgia. Walker hopes he can unseat Democrat

Raphael Warnock, the Baptist minister who won a runoff in January for the unexpired term of retired Republican Johnny Isakson.

Walker has two potential Republican primary opponents, but he’s a strong favorite to win the GOP nomination thanks to his celebrity and his relationship with Trump. Before his time in the National Football League, Walker played for the New Jersey Generals of the United States Football League, a team Trump owned. Relying on their USFL relationship, at the 2020 Republican convention Walker vigorously rejected the idea Trump is a racist.  

Like Tuberville, Walker presents no governing or political experience. He also carries quite a bit of baggage, including allegations of violence toward women, some of which he admitted in his memoir. That makes some Republicans nervous, but most political operatives believe the nomination is his to lose. Also like Tuberville,  he’s keeping a low

profile, dodging interview requests except from friendly outlets like Fox News. Assuming Walker wins the primary, smoking him out likely will become Warnock’s first task in an expensive, high stakes race.

 

Fame Via Media

People who’ve earned fame through media have become another source of Republican candidates. Take J.D. Vance, author of the  acclaimed Hillbilly

Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis. The book spent good parts of 2016 and 2017 on the New York Times best seller list. It made Vance, a former Marine turned Yale Law School graduate, wealthy and famous.  Now he’s seeking the U.S. Senate seat held by retiring Republican Rob Portman.

 

Vance caused a stir in 2016 by slamming Trump as “reprehensible” and saying his policy proposals, “such as they are range from immoral to absurd.” Now faced with the GOP primary electorate in Ohio, Vance has gotten religion. He says Trump was a good president and he regrets the nasty things he said about him.  Having repented, Vance’s celebrity helps make him the favorite in some quarters for the Republican senate nomination.  His political career now represents just another case of elevating expediency over principle.

Oh, and we can’t forget another recent candidate who made his name through the media.  Larry Elder got more votes than any of the other would-be replacements for California Governor Gavin Newsome in the failed September recall election. Elder spent over 25 years as a radio talk show host before seeking the California governor’s chair. His failure hasn’t dissuaded celebrity GOP candidates long on name identity and short on political experience as the Walker and Vance bids attest.

A Different Way for Democrats

The likely contenders for Democratic nominations for U.S. Senate in states like Pennsylvania and

Ohio are men and women with political experience. In Pennsylvania, Lt. Governor John Fetterman and Congressman Conor Lamb lead the way. In Ohio, Congressman and former presidential

candidate Tim Ryan and one-time  Consumer Protection Bureau adviser Morgan Harper probably have the inside track, though others might emerge.

Beyond that, intriguing Democratic newcomers elsewhere spring from social movements aimed at

promoting change. One of the most impactful freshman members of Congress has been Missouri Representative Cori Bush. A registered nurse and minister, she’s led the fight against COVID-related evictions, even sleeping on the U.S. Capitol steps to make her

point. Georgia Representative Lucy McBath ran for Congress so she could

work on gun safety following the shooting death of her son by a man angry about loud music. Transportation Secretary

Pete Buttigeg ran for president because he wanted to be president, but also so he could show that an openly gay man could seek the nation’s highest office.

The motivations and styles of figures like Bush, McBath, and Buttigeg seem much different than the celebrity-based campaigns of the Walkers and Elders of the world. These more independent minded candidates have bucked their own party, not just followed it. Their approach seems more likely to discourage the rush toward autocracy Trump and Republicans now seem hell bent on promoting. 

                                            

STATE OF THE RACE: TWO DOWN AND HOW MANY TO GO?

          

After the New Hampshire presidential primary, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders stands as

the candidate with the most easily imagined nomination scenario. Even if he shouldn’t start writing his acceptance speech, his path appears clearer than any of his rivals. Though voters in only two states have spoken, perhaps we can see a possible outcome.

This situation again illustrates the outsized importance of the first two states --- Iowa and New Hampshire. Despite complaints that their

demographics don’t represent the Democratic electorate, they’ve helped put more than half the initial field on the sidelines, left others barely hanging on, and sent several more toward the door.

The Sanders Path

Because of his ample war chest, filled by small  dollar contributions raised on line, and

his loyal following (the so-called Bernie Bros), Sanders can stay in the race for the long haul. He needs around 30% of the vote in each of the next few contests (he got 26% in New Hampshire). Assuming the

moderates don’t coalesce around one candidate, at that rate, Sanders will outpace the opposition in delegates and keep the money flowing. By mid-March, with the contests in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina, and Super Tuesday done, Sanders

could have an insurmountable delegate lead, even if he hasn’t formally clinched the nomination.

            

That delegate position would create a real problem for a “Stop Bernie” movement. If he arrives at the convention with two or three times more delegates than any one opponent, an effort by party insiders that might hand someone else the nomination will look unfair and very (small “d”) un-democratic.

Joe Biden’s Desperate Plight

Former Vice President Joe Biden remains in the race, despite dismal showings in Iowa and New Hampshire. He now depends on a strong performance in Nevada (February 22) and an out and out victory in South Carolina a week later, where he counts on support from African-Americans. It’s possible neither happens.

In Nevada, former South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who trailed Sanders by less

Pete Buttigieg

than two percentage points in New Hampshire, has money and momentum. Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, the surprise third place New Hampshire finisher, certainly will make a run

Amy Klobuchar

in Nevada, even if she doesn’t have the money and infrastructure for a win. Any success Buttigieg and Klobuchar have would cost Biden, as might a comeback by Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, who finished a disappointing fourth in New Hampshire, getting no delegates.

Elizabeth Warren

South Carolina presents a different situation. Neither Buttigieg nor Klobuchar have much

Black Voters

history of attracting black support. Buttigieg’s problems with police issues in South Bend have been well documented. Klobuchar could soon face questions about her Minnesota prosecutorial record. Sanders has never done especially well among African-American voters either, but he has the money and campaign infrastructure for a significant push. Billionaire Tom Steyer remains in the race despite getting less than 4% in New Hampshire. He has invested significantly in South Carolina, both in ads and campaign staff.

Whatever support Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and Steyer, or even Warren, generate in South Carolina probably comes mostly at Biden’s expense. Meantime, Sanders seems positioned for getting his share and keeping his momentum, even if he doesn’t win the state.

The Looming Mr. Bloomberg

Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, with a personal fortune reported at more than $55 billion, has already spent over $300 million on ads and other promotion since he announced last fall, too late for getting into the early  contests. He’s risen to 17% in one national poll. The Democratic National Committee has changed some rules, soon letting him onto the debate stage.

Anecdotal evidence suggests some black voters might desert the sinking Biden ship for

Bloomberg, despite his stop-and-frisk program in New York. In fairness, Bloomberg can point out positive acts that benefited blacks while he was New York Mayor and since. His television ads featuring glowing praise from President Obama could have a powerful effect. 

Bloomberg’s impact on the race remains

Michael Bloomberg

uncertain. He’s not on the ballot in some states because of his late entry. Support in national polls may not translate into state primary victories and delegates, as Biden now knows so well. Nobody has seen Bloomberg on a presidential debate stage, so how he’ll do is mainly guesswork. But money is the mother’s milk of politics. He has plenty and will spend it.

Where are We?

We started with the fact Bernie Sanders apparently has the most plausible narrative

going forward. Maybe, at this point, he stands as the most likely Democratic nominee. He, however, has challenges too. In Nevada leaders of the powerful culinary workers union remain

nervous  about Sanders and Medicare for all. That union bargained hard for health benefits and many members don’t like the idea of relinquishing them in favor of a government takeover.

More generally, elected Democrats fearful of a standard bearer who embraces the “socialist” label will likely start a vigorous pushback. Since beating somebody with nobody can’t happen, they must find a candidate.

Trump 2020 vs Which Democratic Candidate?

Klobuchar? Buttigieg? The campaign Trump might run against either gives some Democrats pause. Klobuchar, fairly or not, bears the burden of Hillary Clinton’s loss. Trump probably relishes the idea of facing another woman he can insult. Many Americans believe Buttigieg’s sexual orientation isn’t fair game. Trump probably isn’t one of them. Bloomberg?  As we said, he has money but remains untested. Despite the fact New Hampshire provided some clarity and direction, this isn’t over.

The turmoil in the Justice Department over

Trump’s latest intervention into a sentencing recommendation illustrated the corruption and rot in  his presidency, and the need for removing him. The election now represents the only

chance. Whoever Democrats pick, they must get it right.