The next-best thing to Democrats saying that they prefer "none of the above" to any of their current field of presidential candidates is their naming of a non-entrant as their top candidate. That is an implicit rejection of what the party has on offer, a cry of despair over the limitations of those running, and yet that is exactly their situation now.

The Harvard-Harris Poll for November, just released yesterday, contains this sobering indirect rejection. Tom Bevan of Real Clear Politics summed up the bad news in a tweet:

Harvard-Harris, top 5 current 2020 field among Democratic voters:



Biden 29

Sanders 16

Warren 13

Buttigieg 8

Bloomberg 7



If Hillary Clinton and John Kerry get in race?



Clinton 21

Biden 20

Sanders 12

Warren 9

Buttigieg & Kerry 5https://t.co/KiEbT2ik7Z — Tom Bevan (@TomBevanRCP) December 9, 2019



Caricature by Donkey Hotey.

I am not in the business of offering advice to Democrats, but there is even worse news in these figures. The party's political fortunes are tied to younger voters, yet the frontrunners are in their seventies, and the "savior," Hillary Clinton, who would lead the field if she entered, is also in her seventies. The odor of gerontocracy, considering that Nancy Pelosi is the most powerful elected Democrat in the land, is overwhelming.

Peter Buttigieg, who is unable to connect with African-Americans, the most important voting bloc of the party, is the only middle-aged candidate to pick up any hint of popular support. Adding him in the veep slot might help the party with its age problem, but it will do nothing to drive black turnout, unless Cory Booker or another black Democrat somehow surges to win the nomination.

Where is the bench of younger, promising Democrats? Out in left field, with Ocasio-Cortez and the Squad. Or else exiled for heterodoxy, like Tulsi Gabbard.