Many of us in Illinois are snickering, but it’s entirely sensible that “talk is abundant – at least in private,” about Gov. JB Pritzker as a candidate for President of the United States in 2024. That’s what the New York Times reported on Sunday. Check off the boxes on who could win the Democratic primaries for president and you have to put Pritzker at or near the top of the list.
Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are toast, though the Times put it more nicely: “With Mr. Biden facing plunging poll numbers and turning 82 the month he’d be on the ballot, and Vice President Kamala Harris plagued by flagging poll numbers of her own, conversations about possible alternatives are beginning far earlier than is customary for a president still in the first year of his first term.”
Pritzker is among the subjects of that conversation. He “has talked privately about his interest in seeking the White House at some point should the opportunity arise,” wrote the Times, though “his advisers tried to tamp down the prospect, at least for now.”
Is now that time? A better question is why wouldn’t it be the right time?
That’s because the true way to look at who Democrats would turn to is to ask who could win the Democratic primaries. That’s an entirely different matter than who could win a general election or who would make a good president.
The plain fact is that only somebody from the far left, holding Pritzker’s positions on the issues, can make it through the Democratic presidential primaries. Democratic pragmatists and moderates often bemoan that reality, but it’s accepted wisdom.
In fact, it may be more true now than ever. Despite the Democrats’ lurch leftward, rank and file are quite happy with their party. An Economist/YouGov poll taken last month found that only about one in four Democrats (27%) say the current Democratic Party is more left-leaning than they are. A solid majority of 58% of Democrats said the party’s positions match those or are too far to the right.
In short, “Democrats like their party,” as CNN put it this year, despite Republicans and independents thinking otherwise about its leftward shift. And it’s Democrats who determine the outcome of Democratic primaries.
Does Pritzker fit that alignment?
Perfectly.
Ticking though the list of positions important to Democrats shows that Pritzker can be their guy: Global warming? He was the darling of the Glasgow climate summit last month, touting the newly enacted plan for Illinois to move to 100% clean energy by 2050. Abortion? He vowed to make Illinois the “most progressive state in the nation on abortion.” Minimum wage? He delivered on $15/hour. Undocumented immigrants? “Let the word go out from today that the state of Illinois stands as a firewall against Donald Trump’s attacks on our immigrant communities,” Pritzker said after taking office, and a series of welcoming measures was among his first acts. Woke? Gallons of high caffeine coffee would be needed to match him.
The list goes on and on. He has not challenged or criticized the Biden Administration, Democrats in Congress or the direction of his party on a single thing, which is probably no accident.
What obstacles would he face as a presidential candidate?
First, billionaire status would not sit well with many progressives. On the other hand, it sure helps to be able to self-fund most or perhaps all of one’s campaign. Plus, as the Times noted, Pritzker’s money has made him a longtime benefactor of Democrats around the nation. He therefore has some favors to call.
Second, the economy is now the top issue on voters’ minds, and Illinois is underperforming. However, Pritzker has apparently concluded that he can get away with claiming to have turned Illinois around after inheriting a mess because that’s his current message in Illinois. He’s probably right – that he can get away with it, that is. More informed voters know that Illinois is actually floating on a bubble of temporary federal bailout money, but that’s probably being lost on the average voter.
Third, Pritzker would probably have to put the still-open federal tax investigation behind him, which arose from removal of toilets to reduce property taxes. Resolution of that investigation is long overdue.
Fourth, Pritzker’s approval numbers in Illinois may seem underwhelming, hovering around 50%. But look at comparisons. Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is extremely popular with Republicans around the country, is polling no better in his home state of Florida. Same for Michigan’s Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who is also among potential Democratic presidential possibilities. Also, the polling numbers would be disregarded if he wins reelection for governor next year by a reasonable margin, though whether he will remains to be seen.
Those don’t seem like major obstacles when you consider the competitors Pritzker would face. Democrats have no bench.
Pete Buttigieg is widely seen at the top of that list. But he did himself no favors with his absence from his job as secretary of transportation while the transportation logistics problems unfolded.
And he faces a handicap that’s often hushed but widely known by political operatives, which is that many African Americans, who are key to the Democratic vote, don’t favor gay candidates. Rep. Jim Clyburn, a senior Democratic African American congressman and House majority whip, told CNN recently that there was no question that support for an openly gay candidate was a “generational” issue for older African American. “I know of a lot of people my age that feel that way,” Clyburn, who is 79, said. “I’m not going to sit here and tell you otherwise. I think everybody knows that’s an issue.”
Buttigieg won just one state in the 2020 primaries, earning only 21 of the 1,991 delegates needed to win and 2.5% of the national vote.
How about Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar? Yawn. She was a worse vote-getter than Buttigieg in 2020, winning no states and just seven delegates, with just 1.5% of the national vote.
The rest of the potential Democratic candidates listed by the Times are no-names by national standards. The only one truly qualified is Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo but she, according to the Times, has said she is not interested.
In Pritzker, any of them would face a candidate that Democrats would find to be not only right on the issues as they see things, but articulate, funny and poised – somebody comfortable with words, ideas and policy.
Regular readers here will know that this is anything but an endorsement. We and others have a catalog of bitter complaints about Pritzker.
But would that catalog ever become known to national voters? Not likely, given the record of the national, corporate press and big tech platforms. They can and will distort, censor and lie when necessary to support their chosen narratives and candidates. Would they choose Pritzker? That question, ultimately, may be all that matters. For now, it appears Pritzker would suit their known taste better than anybody.