Democrats need a 'celebrity' candidate — and it's not Biden or Sanders

Democrats need a 'celebrity' candidate — and it's not Biden or Sanders

The last four presidential nomination contests have been defined by opportunity and celebrity. The 2020 Democratic nomination race seems unlikely to be an exception.

Opportunity has existed in two forms across these four elections, but was similarly rooted in the negative partisanship that defines American politics. In 2004 and 2012, the incumbent presidents (George W. Bush and Barack ObamaBarack Hussein ObamaProgressive activist: Democratic nominee will 'need to ride a little bit to the center' Progressive activist: Democratic nominee will 'need to ride a little bit to the center' Juan Williams: Trump's incredible shrinking GOP MORE, respectively) were unpopular with opposition partisans and perceived as vulnerable heading into the election. This led to large fields of challengers with no clear favorites. While both parties eventually settled on “safe” nominees — Sen. John KerryJohn Forbes KerryOcasio-Cortez and Cruz's dialogue shows common ground isn't just for moderates 'Landslide' for Biden? A look at 40 years of inaccurate presidential polls Trump campaign considering making a play for blue state Oregon: report MORE (D-Mass.) and former Gov. Mitt RomneyWillard (Mitt) Mitt RomneyThe Congressional Award — a beacon of hope  McConnell defends Trump amid backlash: 'He gets picked at every day' McConnell defends Trump amid backlash: 'He gets picked at every day' MORE (R-Mass.) — there were several “lead” changes in the horse race polling during the nomination phase.

ADVERTISEMENT

For example, in April 2003, former vice presidential nominee and Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) was leading both Kerry and Rep. Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.), but by October 2003, Gen. Wesley Clark was leading Gephardt, Lieberman and former Gov. Howard Dean (D-Vt.). Kerry was still in the top five, but he had dropped from second to fifth. But once the contests got under way and Kerry won Iowa and New Hampshire, activists who were eager to start the campaign against Bush fell in line with the media momentum and made Kerry the winner.

Although Romney’s path to the nomination was harder than Kerry’s because of the newly organized Tea Party, the shape of the race was defined by these activists’ ardent desire to oust Obama from the Oval Office. In 2011 and the first part of 2012, they tried on a variety of candidates from businessman Herman CainHerman Cain'Landslide' for Biden? A look at 40 years of inaccurate presidential polls Another VPOTUS tries for POTUS: What does history tell us? Restaurant association president announces retirement MORE and former House Speaker Newt GingrichNewton (Newt) Leroy GingrichMORE (R-Ga.) to former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.). But Romney, like Kerry, had held steady in the top tier and, after he won Florida in late January and secured most of the available delegates in February and March, his opponents dropped out and Republicans closed ranks.

With no incumbent on the ballot, 2008 and 2016 were open-seat elections. This seems like a different kind of opportunity — a race that has the potential to turn into a choice, rather than a referendum. But with the prevalence of negative partisanship, no contest is a choice. All are about enmity. In other words, while some may believe that Obama won his nomination because of his positive message of “hope,” his victory originated in the desire of activists to “change” from a Democratic Party led by the Clintons. Similarly, President TrumpDonald John TrumpTrump says 'Failing New York Times' should be held 'fully accountable' over Russia report Trump says 'Failing New York Times' should be held 'fully accountable' over Russia report Trump tweets ICE will begin removing 'millions' of undocumented migrants MORE offered conservative activists a way out from the Bush family’s dominance of the Republican Party and the establishment elites, as signified by the late Sen. John McCainJohn Sidney McCainOvernight Defense: US to send 1K more troops to Mideast amid Iran tensions | Iran threatens to break limit on uranium production in 10 days | US accuses Iran of 'nuclear blackmail' | Details on key defense bill amendments Overnight Defense: US to send 1K more troops to Mideast amid Iran tensions | Iran threatens to break limit on uranium production in 10 days | US accuses Iran of 'nuclear blackmail' | Details on key defense bill amendments Senators revive effort to create McCain human rights commission MORE of Arizona.

Celebrity also showed up in two distinct ways. In 2004 and 2012, momentum substituted for celebrity in the nomination contests, but as was revealed in the general election races, momentum fades. The enthusiasm for Kerry and Romney was not lasting, and the anti-incumbent antipathy among independents was not strong enough to prevail. But in 2008 and 2016, enamored activists kept faith with their celebrity nominees and independents were dissatisfied enough to turn these elections into referendums against the incumbent party’s nominees.

So, how will opportunity and celebrity play in 2020? We already know that President Trump’s historic weakness in the polls and high disapproval among opposition partisans and independents has led to the largest field of Democrats ever running.

It is also the case that while former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenTrump hits polling on Fox News: 'Something weird going on at Fox' Trump hits polling on Fox News: 'Something weird going on at Fox' 2020 Democrats look to cut into Biden's lead with black voters MORE may seem like a “safe choice” to take on Trump, Democrats should think twice about what it would mean to nominate someone who is considering a campaign theme of “continuance” as opposed to “change.”

Celebrities don’t have to come from Hollywood, but they do need to have some buzz about them. In order to win, they should already be in the top tier of the horse race polls, be raising solid sums of money, and have a shot at victory in at least two of the first four contests.

When looking across the 2020 candidates, the ones that fit this celebrity bill are Sen. Kamala HarrisKamala Devi HarrisTrump hits polling on Fox News: 'Something weird going on at Fox' Trump hits polling on Fox News: 'Something weird going on at Fox' 2020 Democrats look to cut into Biden's lead with black voters MORE (D-Calif.), former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Texas) and, somewhat amazingly, Mayor Pete ButtigiegPeter (Pete) Paul ButtigiegTrump hits polling on Fox News: 'Something weird going on at Fox' Trump hits polling on Fox News: 'Something weird going on at Fox' 2020 Democrats look to cut into Biden's lead with black voters MORE of South Bend, Ind. Even though Sen. Bernie SandersBernie SandersTrump hits polling on Fox News: 'Something weird going on at Fox' Trump hits polling on Fox News: 'Something weird going on at Fox' 2020 Democrats look to cut into Biden's lead with black voters MORE (I-Vt.) also is in a position to win the contest, it seems there are too many in the party who view him unfavorably for his celebrity to unite the activists around his candidacy.

Looking ahead, we’re surely in for a wild ride, fueled by a debate between those Democrats who believe the party should choose “nostalgia” and a “safe choice” (Biden and the Midwestern battleground) as opposed to “hope and change” and the “future” (Harris, Beto or Buttigieg and the Southern battleground).  

But if there is anything to learn from the last four contests, it’s that when activists fall in love with a celebrity candidate, they elect them. Simply put, Democrats need a celebrity candidate to beat Trump — and Biden is too-much “yesterday’s news” and a “turn-off” to those who voted against Obama’s legacy in 2016 to be that person.

Lara M. Brown is director of the Graduate School of Political Management at George Washington University. Follow her on Twitter @LaraMBrownPhD.