In a blog post
of February 1, Lauren Johnson of the Washington, D.C. firm Speak Strategic,
laid out the reasonable case for Moulton as Democratic presidential nominee
thusly: “Though somewhat new to
politics, Moulton found great success in his first term. In his first two years, he introduced 10
bills – 3 of which passed the House, 2 which were signed into law – including
the Essex River Dredging and Faster Care for Veterans bills which drew
bipartisan support. In this time he also
co-sponsored 270 bills. After retaining
his seat in the 2016 election, in which he ran unopposed, he has expressed
opinions of Democrats changing the ‘status quo’ in order to win back seats in
2018 and 2020, pledging to ‘continue to work with both Republicans and
Democrats to ensure Massachusetts remains at the forefront of progress and
opportunity.’ ”
Johnson
continued, “In looking to 2020 and no clear frontrunner on the Democratic side,
a young, charismatic Marine Corps veteran with the ability to reach across the
aisle who is willing to stand up to President Trump may be just what Democrats
are looking for. So, why not Seth
Moulton?”
Moulton, Johnson
was saying, is at least as good as any other prominent Democrat now being
mentioned as a possible candidate. She
was right. You have not heard anyone say,
for example, that Moulton would have a terrible time in a match-up against
former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley.
Nor have you heard anyone say this or that incumbent Democrat governor
would be an obviously stronger candidate. (Only 16
governorships are currently held by Democrats.
Those governors are, in alphabetical order: John Bel Edwards, Louisiana;
Jerry Brown, California; Kate Brown, Oregon; Steve Bullock, Montana; John
Carney, Delaware; Roy Cooper, North Carolina; Andrew Cuomo, New York; Mark
Dayton, Minnesota; David Ige, Hawaii; Jay Inslee, Washington; Jim Justice, West
Virginia; Dan Malloy, Connecticut; Terry McAuliffe, Virginia Gina Raimondo,
Rhode Island; Tom Wolf, Pennsylvania.) In recent
decades, governors seem to do better than U.S. senators in presidential
elections.
What you
have heard people say about Moulton is they like that he had the gumption to
call for Nancy Pelosi to step aside as the House minority leader and
for the minority party to give new, younger leaders more chances. If Moulton did run for president, and if
Moulton wedded this JFK-like call for new leadership to a Sandersesque
populism, he could become a powerhouse.
There is no
instance in modern times of a U.S. representative, like Moulton, even winning
his party’s nomination for president, and you have to go back to the election
of 1880 to find the last time a House member, James Garfield, went from the
House to the White House. Notably, Garfield
was like Moulton in that Garfield served with distinction during war, the Civil
War, although not as distinctively as Moulton, an active duty Marine officer
for five years who fought on the front lines in both Iraq and Afghanistan and
was awarded a Bronze Star for valor and the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation
medal for valor. According to citations
accompanying the medals, Lieutenant Moulton “fearlessly exposed himself to
enemy fire” while leading his platoon during several pitched battles.
That war
record immunizes Moulton permanently against reflexive Republican assertions
that lefty Democrats are weak on national defense and cannot be entrusted with
the presidency at a time when terrorists want to destroy America. Such claims would have seriously hurt Bernie
Sanders had he been the Democrat nominee last year. Similarly, strength on national defense is a
glaring weakness for Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat whose star power and
money-raising ability outshine Moulton’s, at this point in the game at least.
It would be
amazing if someone who grew up in Salem, MA and earned three degrees from
Harvard (a bachelor’s, a master’s in business, and a master’s in public
administration) became the first member of the House to be elected president in
140 years. The unique historical chance to become that person is certainly reason enough to encourage Moulton to run compared to why Trump was initially encouraged,
i.e., he was good at kicking butt on reality TV, ergo, he would straighten
things out in D.C. in no time.
Too bad Seth
Moulton has sworn off running for president.
I think he’d do fine against either Trump or Trump’s vice president,
Mike Pence, should Trump quit one night in a fit of rage and frustration or be impeached
for any number of good reasons already on the table, first and foremost,
violations of the constitution’s emoluments clause.
Moulton’s no
actor. He never played up his medals
when running for the Congress. His
parents did not even know he’d won those medals until a week before the Boston
Globe’s Walter Robinson wrote an article on Moulton’s war record, “Seth Moulton
underplays military service,” 10-18-14.
At that point, Moulton had been out of the Marine Corps for six
years. In an interview with the Globe
prior to the article’s publication, Moulton asked Robinson not to describe him
as a hero.
When a guy
who’s no act goes against a guy who’s all act, the voting public almost always
sorts it out correctly.
No comments:
Post a Comment