Is our 2020 candidate going to be Harris, Gillibrand, Franken, Gabbard, Zuckerberg, or a sock monkey with "Medicare for All" sewn into the front?
Well, the latter would win too many votes so he's out.
Midterms will show me the hand of what 2020 portends. But right now the tablet says McAuliffe and O'Malley are trying to elbow out everyone else with The Bag Man knowing best how to do this, while O'Malley is probably trying to position himself between Bernie and Lenin. In both cases, the 2020 election will probably be decided on something that is not a rehash of the Hillary/Bernie divide. The candidates will mainly be known quantities. Even people like Deval Patrick and Hickenlooper are more likely than I suspect. Democrats will likely have two-tier debates.
Edit: Also, I don't know why, but I feel like you are the best person to ask if you are aware any kind of comprehensive summation of the ways in which the politics and economics of the Star Trek universe do not make any sense. This is manifestly true to me, but I've not the economics nor political science background to construct such a thing myself.
Here's why it doesn't make any sense: Gene Roddenberry.
See, after TOS became an actual hit, Roddenberry started to think he was as smart as L. Ron Hubbard.
So, Gene proclaimed that in the future humanity would have no conflicts whatsoever, not even between individuals. And Starfleet would exist mainly to go around lecturing lesser races about how they should become more like humans or humans would be dicks to them.
After Gene was shuffled off for being incompetent at his job, Rick Berman was insane enough to keep this edict in place, though the entirety of the DS9 staff pushed back enough against him and he had Voyager to distract himself with that Gene's rule was allowed to bend in DS9. Enterprise worked around the rule by saying "we're in the past and also...we literally can't do anything else since this is an Earth ship with two alien passengers" and also Scott Bakula invoked his powers as the sexist man to ever live to get Braga and Berman fired.
Also, when aliens appear once a season it's way easier to portray them as ALL THE SAME and thus stand-ins for Russkies or what have you. When they're regulars, nobody buys that every Cardassian agrees on everything Gul Dukat says or that all Romulans are suspicious xenophobes. (Which is one reason the Borg and Dominion were so tasty to writers as enemies. They avoid this problem.)
Gene's economic views were tied up in this and thus he made the proclamation early on in TNG about the whole no money thing and the Ferengi were the villains as evil capitalist Jews. Which then other writers had to go and figure out how to explain this, especially with replicators, so somebody fixed it by making certain things unable to be replicated, which completely undermines Gene's Federation requiring it to trade or be surpassed quickly so TNG/DS9/VOY just has the Federation bartering while Picard lectures people about how they've evolved past money because
money is evil corrupting Jew blood.
Quark and others in DS9 regularly poke at this for the writers:
Quark: I think I figured out why Humans don't like Ferengi.
Sisko: Not now, Quark.
Quark: The way I see it, Humans used to be a lot like Ferengi: greedy, acquisitive, interested only in profit. We're a constant reminder of a part of your past you'd like to forget.
Sisko: Quark, we don't have time for this.
Quark: You're overlooking something. Humans used to be a lot worse than the Ferengi: slavery, concentration camps, interstellar wars. We have nothing in our past that approaches that kind of barbarism. You see? We're nothing like you... we're better.
Libertarian writer/law professor Ilya Somin once wrote a series of blog entries about Star Trek where he posited that the Federation may be some form of a fascist society especially considering the high place humans exist in nearly every position of power relative to other races, to which some other writer pointed out that the show is pretty much only shown from the point of view of the Federation and could be almost entirely propaganda produced by the Federation for consumption by non-aligned races.
There's also the fact which I've argued many times before (though not alone) that Voyager makes infinitely more sense and is vastly more interesting if you watch it from the premise that Janeway is the
villain or at least antagonist of the series. (Especially her future self in the finale.) She employs a twisted authoritarian viewpoint, that the rest of the crew submits to with minor protest, that justifies all actions up to and including murder, genocide, near annihilation of the galaxy, and reigniting ended wars in the name of "Federation rules" and she's even entirely arbitrary in her punishment and reward system. All things common in totalitarian states like North Korea or the USSR.
And of course, upon her return to the Alpha Quadrant, she's promoted into a high position of Starfleet Command.
AbramsTrek's universe was created by a 9/11 Truther and the first two films are so poorly produced in all areas they make literally no sense. Their politics seem to be based around a massive future warship destroying two galactic powers for a quarter of a century with nobody caring until Vulcan gets blown away and then those crushed galactic powers immediately preparing for war against one another with massive unprecedented weaponry that even the future ship didn't have until the franchise was saved by Justin Lin and Simon Pegg creating maybe the best film since
The Undiscovered Country.