With their new nominee, Democrats could have their own ‘Morning in America’ moment 

It’s been a while since we had one, but positive campaigns can work under the right circumstances. Reagan’s Morning in America campaign theme earned him one of the biggest landslides in American history. 

Democrats, in their rush to coronate Kamala Harris as their new presidential nominee, are in danger of letting a perfectly good crisis go to waste. 
 
First, in an election where democracy itself will be a big issue, maybe a coronation isn’t the best idea. But an orderly, though slightly boisterous, democratic exercise is just the ticket. The Republican convention was an often cringeworthy celebration of Donald Trump. The Democrats should put on a show and let people watch an actual democratic process play out in real time. 
 
Suppose that the Democratic National Committee finds four candidates to compete for the party’s nomination. For argument's sake, let’s say it’s Kamala Harris, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper. (It’s true that many of these candidates have already endorsed Harris; in this scenario, Harris herself would ask them to put their names forward.) 
 
Once on the short list, the Fantastic Four would do a series of joint town-hall meetings culminating in a debate on the first day of the convention, moderated by Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. While lively, these events would be congenial, showcasing what democracy can and should be. After years of watching Republicans be nasty to one another and getting into fistfights, this would be a revelation. 
 
It would also allow Harris, who, despite serving as vice president, is still relatively unknown nationally, to publicly define herself instead of letting the Trump campaign do it for her. And, since both Shapiro and Cooper are high on the list of possible Harris VPs, they would be able to introduce themselves to voters.  

One of the best things — if you’re a Democrat — about having an actual process play out is that it would use up all the political oxygen in the country for more than a month. Everyone, regardless of their politics, would be riveted. Why would Democrats waste an unprecedented opportunity to showcase the party at its best? 

Using the next month to select a nominee would also let Democrats consider what kind of campaign they want to run. Because they do have a choice. 

One option is trench warfare: continue the Biden campaign themes but with a more effective messenger at the top of the ticket. That would give the country another battle-ground state election where the margin of Electoral College victory is measured in thousands of votes. It’s also the easiest campaign for the Trump campaign to counter. 
 
Kamala Harris would be a very effective candidate for this kind of campaign. Her personality, because she’s an ex-prosecutor, is well-suited for aggressively making a case. She can think on her feet and she can drive home a point. For various reasons, she hasn’t exploited the law enforcement part of her resume, but law and order is a big theme this cycle, and the optics of Prosecutor Harris taking on convicted felon Donald Trump has a lot going for it. 
 
But what if Democrats chose maneuver warfare instead?  

It would work like this: Democrats run a relentlessly upbeat, cheerful campaign, leaving all the hard-hitting attacks (of which there would be loads) to political action committees and surrogates. Stump speeches would be relatively short and punchy. The theme would be, "Why so gloomy, Donald? America is back and getting better." This strategy would serve to remind voters that there's actually quite a lot of good news — Biden had a communication problem, not a performance problem.

Donald Trump's most depressing claims are largely false. He campaigns on violent crime, but it's actually down. Drill, baby, drill? America now produces more oil — and gas — than at any time in its history and more than any nation on earth. The same goes for the unemployment rate, the stock market, the overall economy, you name it.

Now you have a true vision election, of fear versus hope. We’re no longer arguing about who will do more damage to the country, we’re discussing whether we prefer dystopian America or optimistic America. This would completely wrong-foot the Trump campaign. He wants to run a “No, U!” campaign. “You’re a threat to democracy!” “No, you are!” 
 
It’s been a while since we had one, but positive campaigns can work under the right circumstances. Reagan’s Morning in America campaign theme earned him one of the biggest landslides in American history. 
 
Who would be a good candidate for such a campaign? Harris could possibly do this. She can call on an engaging, if slightly weird, communication style when she wants to deliver a positive message. But a big part of this is offering America something fresh. Gretchen Whitmer would be ideal. Fresh, Midwestern nice, and populist in a good way, she’s just the right person to chivy America out of a bad mood. 
 
Kamala Harris would be a fine nominee, but don’t coronate her. This is not a time for half-measures. Having come this far, Democrats might as well go all in and run the best campaign with the best candidate they possibly can. 

Chris Truax is an appellate attorney and a registered Republican who served as Southern California chair for John McCain’s primary campaign in 2008.