<p><a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/430461-the-10-dems-most-likely-to-win-the-2020-presidential-nomination">The Hill</a> yesterday made some predictions on how the Democratic Primary candidates would fare in the elections. In my opinion, they are myopic, biased and mostly plain wrong. We at the Punching Bag Post think we can do better, based on the psychology of the media and our vast (ahem&#8230;) experience in this realm.<br />
So hold onto your britches!</p>
<p><strong>Kamala Harris.</strong> At the moment probably the strongest candidate based on media coverage and will surge out of the gate (the &#8220;gate&#8221; still being some months into the future, I think). As a Californian, she will probably carry her state, as a minority woman she has ammunition against many of the other candidates (and don&#8217;t think that won&#8217;t be a factor!). If she avoids talking about raising taxes, <em><strong>she has a shot</strong></em>.</p>
<p><strong>Joe Biden.</strong> <em><strong>Not a chance in hell</strong></em> for a very simple reason. He is not the most popular candidate right now even though his name recognition is through the roof. He has nowhere to go but down, and will do that precipitously as others gain traction. That is just the way the world works. Plus he has a seriously long history of gaffes and goofs, he will be easily destroyed. There are good reasons why he never pulled more than a percent or two in previous presidential primaries.</p>
<p><strong>Bernie Sanders.</strong> Bernie&#8217;s name recognition could not be higher, and he still has a <strong><em>YUGE</em></strong> following from 2016. He may further gain some sympathy votes. However, ultimate his constituency is limited. <em><strong>A professed socialist cannot win</strong></em> even the Democrat primaries (yet).</p>
<p>However, Bernie&#8217;s presence will have a marked effect. He will force the <em><strong>whole field of candidates to the left</strong></em> and make it very difficult for any middle of the road candidate to reach the very noisy radicals on the left (which may be his secret goal anyway&#8230;). These are some serious handcuffs! It can certainly be said that, but for Bernie, Hillary would have had a much better chance to beat Trump.</p>
<p><strong>Beto O&#8217;Rourke. </strong> Beto is certainly charismatic and has some handsomeness going his way. Only one problem:<em> <strong>HE LOST!</strong> </em>Winners find a way to win and Beto did not win his last election. Yet he believes he can win a much larger, much, more difficult contest. Watch for his campaign to lose momentum and crumble, <em><strong>he is toast</strong></em>.</p>
<p><strong>Elizabeth Warren.</strong> Warren has been tickling the media with her possible bid for the Presidency for quite a while. But right now she is in the Jeb Bush position, a front runner that everyone has been expecting and for whom everyone has a response. The Pocahontas label will follow her and her offputting, erudite manner will come to a head as she faces more charismatic opponents. Plus she is not nearly as smart as she thinks she is, and when it comes to a debate against Klobuchar and Harris she will get hammered. <em><strong>Stick a fork in her, she&#8217;s done.</strong></em></p>
<p><strong>Cory Booker.</strong> <em> The Hill</em> has this partly right, Booker is a lightweight. He will try to position himself as the new Obama, but as much as I hated Obama, this guy is not qualified to carry Obama&#8217;s piss bucket (sorry, I&#8217;m re-reading <em>Shogun</em> right now&#8230;). His ego will keep his campaign going until his money runs out (which will not be considerable) but he has too much stupidity in his history to make a serious run. <em><strong>He will peter out</strong> <strong>mid- or early primary.</strong></em></p>
<p><strong>Amy Klobuchar</strong>. Amy is a monster. She is a hardass, slave driving campaigner and she expects a lot from her people. She is also a winner who has gotten a lot of legislation passed, and whose ego and ambition appear to be channeled and focused on the next level. Her only disadvantages vice Kamala is she won&#8217;t be able to carry as big a state. If she gets funding, <em><strong>she has a shot at the big prize</strong></em>.</p>
<p><strong>Sherrod Brown</strong><em><strong>.</strong></em> Who???? Unless he spends a boatload on name recognition, and finds some kind of meme (or everyone else self destructs, which could happen&#8230;), he is a two percenter. My guess? <em><strong>He is a two percenter.</strong></em></p>
<p><strong>Kirsten Gillibrand.</strong> She has some name recognition, but I haven&#8217;t seen any fire behind her name. She doesn&#8217;t even have the benefit of a strange name, like &#8220;Sherrod.&#8221; <em><strong> Won&#8217;t get out of the gate</strong></em>.</p>
<p><strong>Michael Bloomberg.</strong> The is where <em>The Hill</em> went most wrong. You can NEVER count someone who has $50 Billion out of a campaign. He can afford the best slogan writers Madison Avenue and as former Mayor of New York, he knows exactly who they are. And he can afford to hire world class campaign runners in every state. He can afford armies of investigators to dig up dirt on his opponents and he most certainly will. This is enough to make most people forget that they will never be able to buy a soda more than 8 ounces again!</p>
<p>If he decides to run it will be a spectacle to behold, and <em><strong>he could easily be the frontrunner to win</strong></em>. And if he loses after a tough primary, he will have destroyed the winner for the general election. On the other hand, he could just dip his toe in the water, like Trump did in 2012 and then drop out.</p>
<p><strong>Howard Schultz.</strong> The billionaire CEO of Starbucks was not included in <em>The Hill</em>&#8216;s list, a major oversight on their part. Schultz made recent news and garnered huge name recognition when he said he might run as an independent. This, even though he has been a stolid Democrat for most of his life. He has said that he does not think he could win the Democratic Primary in this atmosphere of radical left-ness. But he has also said that he will not be a spoiler, either.</p>
<p>If Schultz does indeed join the fray, he would be formidable. He is a clean cut common sense guy who is associated with a brand that every liberal loves. <em>And he has a bank account!</em> He perhaps does not have the clout of Bloomberg, but then again he doesn&#8217;t have Bloomberg&#8217;s baggage of being a complete asshole either. He may have made a mistake in declaring he might make a third party stand and taking sharp rebukes from Party hacks, but it propelled his name into the limelight.</p>
<p>As we mentioned before, the Bernie factor means that Schultz will have a tough time reaching the far left. This will be a disadvantage against Kamala and Amy, but if the mainstream party gets tired of the B.S. and vitriol,<em><strong> Schulz could find himself on top</strong></em>.</p>
<p><strong>My Predictions?</strong> One of these will be the Democratic candidate for President: Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Michael Bloomberg or Howard Schulz.</p>
<p> ;</p>
<p> ;</p>
<p> ;</p>
<p> ;</p>