Some Democrats have concluded from recent election results that they ought to nominate more heterosexual, Christian white men — and especially that they ought to nominate someone of that description for president. Matthew Yglesias pushes back against that idea, emphasizing the lack of evidence that general-election voters penalize candidates for being women or non-white and arguing that candidates’ positions on the issues matter more.
Which makes me wonder: Might a non-white Democratic candidate be better able than a white one to get the party’s liberal primary voters to stomach moderate positions that appeal to the general electorate?