One of the most memorable moments of Kamala Harris' Monday night town hall interview with Jake Tapper on CNN came in her answer to this question:
"Many Democrats that I've spoken with agree that the primary objective for 2020 is to nominate the candidate that has the best shot at defeating Donald Trump. Some have also said that given what occurred in 2016 and the current political climate, that a male nominee will have a better chance this time around than a female nominee. Would you please respond to this so that this man has a response ready the next time a man tries to mansplain why a man would make a better nominee."
Harris burst out laughing and jumped to her feet, clapping - along with the rest of the audience.
Remaining on her feet, she took command of the stage.
"Well, my first response is that the person who presented that point really is not giving the American voters enough credit," she said.
"They're smarter than that. The people who vote, the people who live in this country, are smarter than that. They're going to make decisions based on who they believe is the best leader. They're going to make decisions based on who they believe is speaking truth, who is doing it in a way that gives people dignity, doing it in a way that elevates public discourse, as opposed to bringing us to the lowest common denominator and base instinct. That's how the voters are going to vote, and that's going to be the basis upon who will win.
"And as far as I'm concerned, listen, in my entire career, I have heard people say - when I ran and ran as the first woman who would win - 'Oh it's not, people aren't ready, it's not your time, nobody like you has done that before.'
"I haven't listened and I would suggest nobody should listen to that kind of conversation."
The crowd went nuts clapping.
She's also for Medicare for all, and she calls Trump's wall a "medieval vanity project." Applause followed.
Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz also has to be mansplained - or maybe Demsplained.
He has said he is seriously considering running for president as a "centrist independent" in 2020.
Yeah, we know. All of the labels - centrist independent, Democratic socialist, green new deal radical - can be confusing - downright scattering.
The "mansplain" questioner of Harris on Monday was dead-spot-on.
Democrats in the coming two years cannot allow themselves to be splintered by gender, race or so-called political strategy.
But neither can we get hung up (or hung out to dry) by labels - except maybe that independent or libertarian or green party stuff. This is no time to split the Democratic ballot with the newest menu item.
The stakes are too high. America cannot become Russia's newest territory, and four more years (even two more) might be all it takes as GOP senators and congressmen get trapped in their own label soup. Washington Post columnist Max Boot summed up the Republican hairball nicely Monday with this: "Memo to Republicans: 'Trump first' is not the same thing as 'America first.'"
Boot continued: "Congressional Republicans are suffering from a bad case of Stockholm syndrome. They've seen what's happened to 'the formers' who crossed the bully in the White House Not even the loss of 40 House seats in 2018 and President Trump's wretchedly low approval numbers can shake his iron grip on their fragile psyches. It's as though their kidnapper had left them alone in the house, but they're too scared to step outside."
So, Democrats. Let's not mess this up.
Schultz has some demonstrated business creds, but his view of "socially liberal and economically conservative" is, as New York Times pundit David Leonhardt posits, "a myth." And a bit elitist, too - think high-income American.
In reality, the American public is closer to being "socially conservative and economically liberal" than the reverse, Leonhardt argues.
First let's think about socially conservative: More than half of Americans say they pray daily. About 53 percent say abortion should be legal either "only in a few circumstances" or never. And they think immigration is a big problem.
As for economically liberal, consider: Large majorities of Americans oppose cuts to Medicare and Social Security and favor expanded Medicaid. They favor higher taxes on the wealthy and corporations. They favor a higher minimum wage and more aggressive government action to create jobs.
No matter any of our views, 2020 will bring us new opportunities.
Plenty of candidates, like this week's Harris and Schultz, already have had first interviews. In coming weeks and months, there will be many more.
Please, let's all listen to them.
And, as Harris says, let's give ourselves license and credit for knowing "smart" and "truth" and "leadership" as we make our voting choices.