(Here's where I take a moment to emphasize that I'm speaking of liberals and Democrats, not progressives and hard leftists, for two reasons: 1) I was never a hard leftist, so it's harder for me to get into that mind frame; 2) to the extent any of this might be useful, it will be so in understanding and potentially engaging with those who are not so far on the other side that there is no shared reality — i.e., the rational persuadables. (Hillary's got her deplorables; I've got my persuadables.))

So, as I watch my former party imploding in the midst of all the other unfolding chaos in the world, I find myself wondering: Where would I be now? How would I be processing these developments, and what would I be wanting to see happen? It's a purely speculative exercise, of course — there's no way to test its validity and ensure that I'm not simply projecting my now decidedly further right views onto the past me. Still, it might be instructive — a window of sorts into the present mindset of the moderate Democrat. (Yes, they absolutely still exist. I know many, including family and friends.) 

I guess the starting point is to acknowledge that the Democrat me would almost certainly have voted for Joe Biden in 2020. So there would be the desire to continue justifying that vote, and likely that would generate some resistance to giving him the heave-ho in 2024. 

That said, I also know that Biden's physical and cognitive decline would have been inescapable. I can't say for certain what news sources I'd be consuming in 2024 — my instinct is probably CNN and WaPo — but I do know for certain that I'd be aware of it, just based on comments that friends and relatives (who voted for him) have made in recent months, particularly given the fact that I'm a political junkie. 

I also feel fairly confident that, on some level, I'd have to grudgingly acknowledge that his presidency has not been a success by most objective metrics. (That might not be something I'd be willing to admit out loud, but I'd be aware of it.) 

Which means that, with an eye toward the Democrats retaining the presidency in November, I'd likely have been wanting a different nominee. That option wasn't really provided to Missouri Democrats — a "presidential primary" was held in March, but it was largely for show. I'm not even sure any of the Democrats I know bothered to vote in it since it was clearly a foregone conclusion that Biden would win. (To illustrate, the total number of votes cast in Missouri's 2024 Democratic primary was 18,524; in 2020, it was 630,721; in 2012 — when Barack Obama was the incumbent, it was 72,888.)

I think the fact that Biden was foisted on the Democrats as a foregone conclusion would have ticked off Democrat me. I would have had concerns about his viability as a candidate in addition to being aggravated by the lack of realistic alternatives presented. I don't know that I'd have been impressed with Rep. Dean Phillips (MN), and I know I'd not have been on board with Marianne Williamson. 

You know who I think I'd have backed? Robert F. Kennedy Jr. My family was big on Kennedy lore, and I was steeped in it from the time I was a kid. Combine that with the fact that RFK Jr. generally toes the moderate Dem line on most topics (though is admittedly out there on a few), and I believe that's who Democrat me would be supporting in 2024. Of course, the hitch there is that he isn't officially on the ballot in Missouri yet. The deadline for it is July 29, so whether he'll make it onto the ballot remains to be seen. If not, that would leave me writing RFK Jr. in unless...

The Dems are able to pull off an 11th-hour switcheroo. I can tell you that part of me would be right pissed that they boxed out a competitive primary only to pull this kind of mad scramble ahead of the convention and election. I'm stubborn enough that I might well decide I don't care who they sub in and stick with my original choice. 

Now, if there was a glimmer that things might be close in Missouri, I could see myself relenting and going with the mystery Democrat nominee, strategically hoping to somehow fend off the Bad Orange Man. (Because, remember, Democrat me would not be able to countenance DJT.) Then the question becomes: In that eventuality, who would I be hoping the Democrats subbed in? 

Kamala Harris? She's the obvious choice from a logistical standpoint. Yet her tenure as vice president has been singularly unimpressive. If Dan Quayle was a talking feather in the Doonsebury realm, then Harris would be a bubble at best. Even as a conservative, I had higher expectations for Harris than she has delivered. And I know from comments made by Democrat acquaintances that her approval numbers are fairly reflective of overall sentiments regarding her. 

More Biden Debate Disaster Fallout: Kamala Harris Hardest Hit

REPORT: Biden Asking Advisers If Kamala Can Win

Hillary Clinton? Hard pass. I didn't care much for Hillary, even when I was a full-fledged liberal Democrat. Democrat me likely would have voted for her in 2016 if only to vote against Trump. But she wasn't likable enough then and she's not gotten any more so since. 

She's also representative of the Democratic old guard and I do believe Democrat me would be looking to turn the page and bring in someone younger and fresher. 

Michelle Obama? Maybe. Democrat me would probably like her well enough, but I'd also be concerned at her lack of political, legislative, or executive experience. Plus, I'd wonder if her heart was truly in it. She's never signaled that she aspires to office, much less the Oval Office. 

So that would leave us primarily (no pun intended) with the gubernatorial options who've been mentioned: Gavin Newsom (CA), JB Pritzker (IL), Andy Beshear (KY), Wes Moore (MD), Gretchen Whitmer (MI), Josh Shapiro (PA). I think a Democrat me, thinking strategically and getting past my resentment of the way the party has handled this whole fiasco, would look for a pairing of two from that group. In terms of pulling in needed fence-sitters, my instinct is that a pairing of Newsom and Whitmer or Moore and Whitmer would best fit that bill. Whitmer likely needs to be in the mix to blunt the gripes about ditching Kamala/a woman (yes, we'll proceed under the assumption that everyone agrees on the definition of such) and to potentially pull Michigan back into the winnable category. 

But see: New Poll Spells Doom for Biden in Michigan, As Gretchen Whitmer Does Inflatable Tube Man Impression

The question as to which pairing would best suit the Dems' needs isn't whether those who plan to vote (if for no other reason than to oppose Trump) will vote for it — they will. It's which pairing will generate the most excitement/buzz/enthusiasm. Is it His Hair Gelled Excellence? Or Moore, who, though younger and less well-known, has the military and academic background liable to appeal to voters and, of course, also happens to be to African American. 

My money says if the Dems manage to pack Old Joe off to Shady Pines and send Kamala off with a nice door prize, they'll wind up with Whitmer/Moore. And Democrat me would likely vote for that ticket, particularly if I thought it would be close in Missouri. (The one thing mitigating against that would be Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and how invested she is in pushing Newsom across the line. She may be willing to go along with Whitmer/Moore if she perceives that Trump is likely to win regardless. That burns them off and clears the way for Gav in 2028.) 

One last note I'll add while sporting my old donkey ears: Democrat me would have been shaken by the assassination attempt on Trump and would also have to grudgingly admire his immediate, "bada--" response to it, just as other notable Dems have. 

Bill Maher Decimates Biden Team, Media on Trump Assassination Attempt

Mark Zuckerberg's Unexpected Reaction to Trump Assassination Attempt

So, there you have it — a window into the Dem-me mind. Does that mean all — or even most — Dems are thinking like that at present? No. But I'm willing to bet a sizable number of them are. And if my Whitmer/Moore prediction comes to fruition...I'll go buy some Powerball tickets.