Love him or hate him, no candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination has polarized the party’s voters more than Beto O’Rourke. The only one close is also the only one who has attracted a similar number of small donors amounting to a large number of dollars, Bernie Sanders.
Thomas B. Edsall of the New York Times takes an in-depth look at what all the fuss is about, checking in with
Most agree he’s to the right of the party center, and acknowledge that his proficiency at fundraising can keep him in the race longer than most. They also agree that he’s so far offering nothing specific on which voters can judge him. What they disagree about is whether that’s a positive or a negative.
Those who think O’Rourke is a passing fad note that a white man running a centrist campaign is wrong for the moment, and focus on his lack of specifics. Those who love him don’t care. They think he’s got charisma and a rare ability to get people to like him.
Edsall doesn’t pick a side. He basically agrees with those he talked to who think it’s too early to say whether the vagueness will be an asset. My take: Vague generalities got Obama elected, and they’re going to make Beto tough to eliminate.