Bret: Federalism — dividing power between Washington and the states — is a very good thing, not least for uniting such a big country. But you’re right: It’s strange to think of our Manhattanite president being the political beneficiary of Jeffersonian distrust of big cities.

Gail: I would love to see a presidential candidate who could do something to bring the regions closer together. As to the left-center thing, we’ll have to wait and see. Most of the 2,000 or so Democrats who are out there waving their hands are perfectly capable of going either way, depending on what they think it’ll take to win.

Do you have a favorite? Or six?

Bret: For starters, I hope Democrats choose a governor or ex-governor, someone with broad executive experience, rather than a senator or congressman.

Gail: Everybody yearns for a governor. I know the part about executive experience is true, but don’t you think part of the allure of the governors is that nobody actually sees them around all that much? It’s hard to get sick of them, unless you actually happened to be governed by one of the hot names in question.

But you were talking about favorites. Go on.

Bret: Next thing, a candidate who is from a purple or even a red state, and knows how to talk to and bargain with the other side. Bill Clinton had that gift, which is what helped make him an effective president. So the names that spring to my mind are New Hampshire’s Maggie Hassan, Colorado’s John Hickenlooper or New Orleans’s Mitch Landrieu, rather than, say, Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren or Cory Booker.

By the way, there’s been talk that Hillary Clinton might try to run again. If she asked your advice as to whether to do it, what would you tell her?

Gail: I would tell her: “Hillary, it looks like you’re having fun with this. Go ahead. I presume you understand it’s totally make-believe.”