There is a form of argument that’s become more popular online that seeks to invert the old trope of “strawmanning” an argument. That is, rather than set up a weak version of an argument to knock down like, well a strawman, you make the hardest possible case for an argument, a “steelman” as it were, so then you can knock it down too, I guess.
Argumentative tricks aside, I think the whole concept of “steelmanning” can be helpful when thinking about politics, not because it tells you what’s going to happen, but rather how it helps to clarify what could in fact happen.
There were a million and one reasons to think Trump could never become president the day he came down that escalator, and yet here we are. Likewise there were just as many to doubt Obama could win in 2005, but this is also a thing that did in fact happen. Thus as the 2028 presidential cycle heats up, I think steelmanning can be a useful way to think about this stuff.
To be clear, these posts aren’t going to be about winning a general election, if you learned one thing from The Trump Years it should be this: candidate effects in presidential elections are small, if you’re the nominee of a major party you can win. If even a know nothing game show host who boasted on tape about sexually assaulting women can win, well then anyone can, even you! So clearly the real question is about party nominations, which is what these posts will focus on.
Accordingly I’m going to start with Josh Shapiro (kind of a lay up to be honest) but I plan to work at tougher nuts as we go through this. So, yes, the "Invisible Primary” is well underway (New Hampshire, like Monday, gets here sooner than you’d think!)
THE STEELMAN CASE FOR JOSH SHAPRIO
Please take a comfortable seat and close your eyes. Take three deep breaths. Now purge your mind of all you know about the chaos in the Middle East. Yes, all the carnage and horror, the wars and insanity, the gas prices(!) and violent absurdity. Yes, set that aside. Now in your mind picture a man, he is handsome with nice hair. He’s the sort of man you’d like to live across the street from. A committed professional yes, but also a family man, with a loving wife and adoring children. He likes sports, and can make intelligent comments while watching a game. He looks good in a suit, and blue jeans too. And he has nice hair, did I mention that?
Now imagine this man is the governor of the most important state in the Electoral College and is probably going to steam roll his opponent by double digits this November.
Now open your eyes and see the guy you wished you married or was your roomie in college: Joshua David Shapiro.
That’s basically the argument. He’s “presidential” and he’s super popular in the most important state in presidential politics. There it is.
Okay that would make for an anti-climatic blog post so I’ll add in some stuff, but seriously, don’t over think it. If Dems are desperate to win in 2028, there’s your man.
But if that’s not enough here’s some more:
Shapiro is a proven fundraiser and as a governor of a big state has a real fundraising base to draw from, Philly is a major commercial center after all. Also, and I want to be very careful how I phrase this…so let me say it this way: I think as a candidate for president Josh Shapiro would be able to put together a substantive national fundraising network to complement his natural fundraising base back home in PA. Okay, did I do that right?
Basically Shapiro might not be the biggest fundraiser of the cycle but he can put enough cash for his campaign and allied superPACs together to be viable and duke it out say between New Hampshire, Super Tuesday and beyond if it comes to that.
THE CASE AGAINST
To be blunt, becoming president is, well, hard, even if Trump was able to do it. I have over 20 people in my Google sheet tracking Dems who are making moves for 2028 and we are just getting started here. So in all likelihood Shapiro won’t be the nominee, just because, well it’s hard and a lot of other people could win.
But I have been seeing a real uptick in people doing lazy thinking that Shapiro just can’t win because he’s Jewish, or perhaps Democratic primary voters are too antisemitic* to vote for him.
I don’t think that argument holds up to much scrutiny. Which isn’t to say antisemitism hasn’t been a real force in American history (it has!) or that we haven’t seen a major increase in antisemitism recently (we really have!), it’s that I don't see those realities translating into a Jew being unable to win Democratic primary elections.
Here in Minnesota (not a particularly Jewish state) we have a long proud history of electing Jewish senators for years. South Minneapolis isn’t exactly Williamsburg, but we kept electing Frank Hornstein for 20 years, we couldn’t get enough of the guy!
Or to put it another way, if Democratic primary voters won’t vote for a Jew in primary elections…then why do they keep nominating Shapiro for governor in Pennsylvania?
This isn’t to say that Shapiro doesn’t have a real challenge on his hand in navigating Gaza, and his faith, the war with Iran, and the recent massive public shifts in opinion about Israel blah blah blah. These are real challenges he will have to face. But it’s not clear to me that these are harder challenges to address than say Secretary Mayor Pete’s well documented struggles with winning black voters or Harris’s problem with the contemporary Democratic Party’s deep skepticism of nominees who lost and want to run again.
Will Shapiro win? Probably not, but you could say that about basically every Democratic contender at this point. The thing to remember is he certainly has a shot. As much as a skinny kid with a funny name and grand designs once did, long ago.
*James Kirchick basically makes this argument at the end of a recent episode of Barro et al's pod
