Book timing suggests Michelle Obama running for president in 2020

Michelle Obama looks as though she wants to run for president in 2020, tweeting out yesterday that her new book will be published five days after the midterm election on November 13.  Many observers believe that this signals her candidacy, hoping to capitalize on momentum generated by Democrat gains in Congress.

William A. Jacobson sees Michelle Obama as unbeatable in the contest for the Democrats' nod:

Let the commoners like Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and assorted other Democrat hopefuls jockey for position.  They do not have the star power of Michelle.  It's why there was a rush to embrace Oprah when after her Golden Globes speech – Democrats are desperate for someone who can spark the Obama magic once again, who can serve to unify and motivate various factions of the party the way Mr. Obama did.

Everyone in the Democratic Party understands that without black voter turnout well over 90%, the party has a difficult time winning the presidency.  And the only way to generate that level of enthusiasm is to have a black at the top of the ticket, with bonus points for a glass-ceiling-breaking female as the nominee.  On the other hand, the party learned a hard lesson by handing the nomination to another first lady. 

Barack and Michelle Obama joined the ranks of the super-rich when they received a reported $65-million advance for one book each from Penguin Random House, a publishing giant controlled by Germany's Bertelsmann.  The windfall more than doubled the combined total received by Bill and Hillary Clinton for their post-presidency books.  Timing the book just after the midterms could be a shrewd commercial decision.

During her husband's presidency, Michelle Obama enjoyed strong approval in polling, as every first lady traditionally has.  But that status is dependent on not being active in the nitty-gritty of politics and serving as a representative of the entire American people.  Hillary Clinton discovered that the cachet as first lady does not necessarily translate into victory in a presidential election.

Hillary Clinton at least served as a senator and secretary of state, whereas Michelle Obama has never served in public office, and her last professional engagement was as a highly paid official at the University of Chicago Hospitals, a job she received when her husband was elected to the Senate.  Her function there seems to have been diverting money-losing patients lacking insurance to other hospitals.

I certainly wouldn't put it past the Democrats to nominate an empty dress for president on the basis of name recognition and identity politics.  But will the American voting public be anxious to return to the policies that generated a purported "new normal" of low economic growth and stagnant wages?

Bernie Sanders has not yet commented.  He still harbors hope of gaining the nomination he was cheated out of in 2016.

Michelle Obama looks as though she wants to run for president in 2020, tweeting out yesterday that her new book will be published five days after the midterm election on November 13.  Many observers believe that this signals her candidacy, hoping to capitalize on momentum generated by Democrat gains in Congress.

William A. Jacobson sees Michelle Obama as unbeatable in the contest for the Democrats' nod:

Let the commoners like Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and assorted other Democrat hopefuls jockey for position.  They do not have the star power of Michelle.  It's why there was a rush to embrace Oprah when after her Golden Globes speech – Democrats are desperate for someone who can spark the Obama magic once again, who can serve to unify and motivate various factions of the party the way Mr. Obama did.

Everyone in the Democratic Party understands that without black voter turnout well over 90%, the party has a difficult time winning the presidency.  And the only way to generate that level of enthusiasm is to have a black at the top of the ticket, with bonus points for a glass-ceiling-breaking female as the nominee.  On the other hand, the party learned a hard lesson by handing the nomination to another first lady. 

Barack and Michelle Obama joined the ranks of the super-rich when they received a reported $65-million advance for one book each from Penguin Random House, a publishing giant controlled by Germany's Bertelsmann.  The windfall more than doubled the combined total received by Bill and Hillary Clinton for their post-presidency books.  Timing the book just after the midterms could be a shrewd commercial decision.

During her husband's presidency, Michelle Obama enjoyed strong approval in polling, as every first lady traditionally has.  But that status is dependent on not being active in the nitty-gritty of politics and serving as a representative of the entire American people.  Hillary Clinton discovered that the cachet as first lady does not necessarily translate into victory in a presidential election.

Hillary Clinton at least served as a senator and secretary of state, whereas Michelle Obama has never served in public office, and her last professional engagement was as a highly paid official at the University of Chicago Hospitals, a job she received when her husband was elected to the Senate.  Her function there seems to have been diverting money-losing patients lacking insurance to other hospitals.

I certainly wouldn't put it past the Democrats to nominate an empty dress for president on the basis of name recognition and identity politics.  But will the American voting public be anxious to return to the policies that generated a purported "new normal" of low economic growth and stagnant wages?

Bernie Sanders has not yet commented.  He still harbors hope of gaining the nomination he was cheated out of in 2016.