Which of the Democrats can defeat Trump?

This year's November American presidential election is most important in the country's modern history. If an increasingly authoritarian, vengeful, and dangerous Donald Trump wins another mandate, it will dictate what will be the US for a long time in the future.

This year's elections will not be a typical war between two parties that differ more on scale than in their nature. But first, the Democrats have to choose their candidate, and this time the internal race is extremely tough.

Former Vice President John Biden's third attempt to win the nomination as the official candidate of Democrats for president will not be much better than the first two. Biden is a popular figure. A positive, empathetic, and lacking wickedness.

But his strengths will most likely also determine his election defeat. He misses what I call a typical spresidcial property: consciousness, and a certain distance,

which conveys the feeling that ignoring him from others would be an unwise move.

In the meantime, he lacks a message: reminding the Democrats that he was a deputy in Barack Obama's time, he tells little or no voters how he would rule if he won.

Elizabeth Warren is in the same situation. From the beginning, she answered the questions by saying: ” I have a plan for this thing!” It has knowledge of domestic governance, and has developed a passionate campaign. But she did not seem to understand that the adoption of so many new programs would be impossible.

Some of the Senate's colleagues, including Allies, told me earlier that she would not look good “. They don't like her moral attitude. Warren has a moat with democratic voters, which may be narrowed down with her fans.

Senator Bernie Saunders is also a victim of many promises. He still enjoys great support for younger voters. Meanwhile, most elderly voters ask where he will get the money to fulfill all his promises, including free schooling at public universities, and forgiveness of student debt.

Like Warren and Saunders, they're in trouble with universal health insurance “Medier for All”. Neither one nor the other has shown how replacing “Obacare” with the system of a single paymentman will increase taxes for the middle class, while some unions oppose it, as it would replace the best health care plans they negotiated, giving up other benefits.

Sanders, a self-declared democratic “socialist, is a disturbing figure at a time when party unity is seen as crucial to defeating Trump. Sanders' ideological warmth limits his non-resistance in the inner race. For that reason, he has failed to increase his electorate.

Although he won in New Hampshire, a state border with his country of origin, Vermont, he won 50 percent less votes than in 2016. But now, he cannot be ruled out as a strong opportunity for official nomination. Aided by a political press seeking new fables, and a good debate four nights before the New Hempshare race, Senator Amy Klobushar turned her third country (was fifth in Iowa) into a “movement”. But the debates are a weak indication of a presidency: they prove goodwill, understanding and a vision, but reveal little about temperament, judgment, curiosity, wisdom, and the diplomatic capacity of candidates.

For now, Klobushar's spectacularity has overshadowed her reputation for wisdom. Meanwhile, she lacks a vision. She boasts an impressive record of elections won in Minnesota, where she has not had a strong rival, and often highlights her modest origin (her grandfather was a miner in a coal mine).

What she doesn't point out is support that gives her to corporations, including agribusiness giant “Cargill”, one of America's most controversial companies. Pete Batgig, 38, has been the most surprising phenomenon in this race, thanks to his keen intellect, and his unusual tranquillity.

His rivals ridicule his humble political experience as mayor of a small town ( South Bend, Indiana, but it has familiarized him with the way the federal programs work. He joined the American Army as a volunteer and served in Afghanistan, and has very mature thoughts on foreign policy, rather than most of his rivals (except Biden).

He is married to a homosexual man, has a natural sense of humor, and can humiliate his opponent in a way that remembers Obama. But is that enough to win? Bill Clinton was empathetic. Americans saw Obama crying after the massacre at Sandy Hook elementary school in 2012. It's hard to imagine Batigu crying.

After Mike Bloomberg, the mayor of New York for 3 mandate, grew in the polls, his figure was starting to be further analysed. For example, he is accused of racism during his post as mayor, and of misogising in his business practices.

The vulgar statements he made before the mayor is elected are now widely circulated. But Blumberg has used his vast wealth to self-finance his campaign, build important alliances, and offer grants to mayors, most of them black, and helping women move on.

Moreover, Blumberg's ruling experience and his calm manner of conduct in public make him appealing to many. Its greatest advantage is that it is seen as the most adaptable to defeat Trump, who seems frustrated by the prospect of facing a challenge far richer than he is (and that he does not use his unusual business practices in New York).

Being able to buy political advantage may be unfair or wrong, but Trump is such an alarming figure that many voters so far are willing to overlook what they would never once forgive. This is because this year's elections are under way in a time of crisis for American democracy.

“Project Syndicate” World.al