Allow me to elaborate.Bog wrote
This must be my naïveté regarding what the hell constitutes a "winner", per se, because I come away from both sets of debates (all 4 nights) thinking Cory Booker made zero missteps, always kept his composure, debated amongst fellow candidates without failure, and succeeded with the likability factor more than anyone...sans probably Liz...
I am admittedly a fan, and even moreso post both debates...the fact he isn't gaining ground and also doesn't really have a shot to even be on the ticket outside of a Warren/Booker 2020 run continues to baffle me...if the objective is win at all costs.
Cory Booker is a very talented politician. Check out the Oscar-nominated Street Fight to learn more about his first run for Mayor in 2002. He strikes me as someone who probably missed his moment due to timing. He was running for Mayor when he should have been running for Governor. He was running for Senate, when he should have been in his second term. It feels like Cory Booker has been around forever but he's only been in the Senate since 2013 (it would've been 2014 if Lautenberg hadn't died in office). And because Chris Christie was Governor during his term, he wasn't able to fulfill his God-given destiny of becoming Hillary Clinton's running mate. I've said this before but Cory Booker was designed in a lab to be Hillary Clinton's Vice President. He's a good attack dog and cheerleader. I also think he would have been useful to have him on their team when it came to reading the tea leaves about which communities weren't being sufficiently galvanized. I know running mates don't change anything but this election was so close that someone like Cory Booker could've made a difference.
But there are a lot of things about him that scream "Lifestyle Left." He's a vegan. He's a bachelor. He's dating a celebrity. And he doesn't really have a driving personal message. There's nothing like Obama's 2004 DNC speech or Hillary Clinton's drive for healthcare and family care for example. I would even say that Joe Biden's "Fighting for the Soul of America" line comes across as more genuine. For Cory Booker, he's a "Why not?" candidate in a crowded field.
Now that the party has moved into three different directions (Moderates, Progressives, Representation), it's hard to see where Cory Booker fits. Nobody can really pick him as a running mate because they need a woman or a person of color. He won't be Elizabeth Warren's running mate because Progressive Dems don't trust him. Before his Presidential run, he took as much corporate money as anyone else in the party. There is video of him in 2012 defending Mitt Romney's activities with Bain Capital. If Elizabeth Warren picked Cory Booker, it would say more about the convictions of Elizabeth Warren than anything about Cory Booker. As for the other two lanes, they're currently occupied. Joe Biden is the overwhelming choice of the Moderates and Kamala Harris is the overwhelming choice of the Representation Democrats (a name I'm just using at random, but those who believe nominating somebody from a certain group is ultimately essential for protection, and they're not wrong). To some degree, Cory Booker is hanging around hoping that those lanes clear out, hoping that Joe Biden fumbles and he can present as a voice of reason, or Kamala Harris implodes and people of color need a champion. To me, it's just so unlikely that both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris exit the field.
And they would literally have to because right now Cory Booker is polling at 7th in Iowa (2.5%), 9th in New Hampshire (1.3%), 6th in South Carolina (3.3%), 8th in Nevada (2.5%), and 8th in California (1%). I know that we're half a year out from the first primary but my opinion of Cory Booker hasn't changed: I didn't totally know how he thought he could win when he first announced and I still don't, although I'm enjoying him on the stage.
Ironically, the politician he reminds me of the most? Joe Biden, someone who might do pretty well in the general if only he could get through the primary.