Hey. I'm going on vacaation to Washington DC this week, so I felt it appropriate to do this bona fide politcal column/analysis. Have a good week all, good luck with move in if I don't get back to see you.
And so people who don't care about politics, I challenge you to read and get as much out of this as you can. And to reward you, I'll put a picture link of jello being nailed to a wall at the bottom.
Peace,
Chris
Hilary? McCain? Ha ha. No.
From where will our nominees come?
Understandably, when looking for a Presidential nominee, we start in the Senate. It has long been thought that the Senate it comprised of the most honorable, experienced, wise, and skillful politicians in our public service construct. Many politicos believe that the Senate is a veritable farm of political leadership, and that there is no place better to find a candidate suited to win in a national election.
Believe it no more. This the distinction belongs to our Governors.
Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, and Carter were all Governors when they campaigned for their party’s nomination. Going back further, we can note that Gerald Ford failed win a full term (he was a Congressman) and that Richard Nixon was VP before rising to the oval office. Lyndon Baines Johnson is the most recent former US Senator to have won a Presidential election, and LBJ was launched to the Presidency by an assassin’s bullet.
John F. Kennedy is the last US Senator to make the direct jump from the Senate to the Presidency. He did it in 1960, twelve national elections ago. Fact is, with the emphasis we (and our medias) put on national, as opposed to regional, politics, senators are damaged goods by the time they get to the end of the primary season.
We all saw what happened to John Kerry. Sure, he wasn’t exactly resolute in his politics, but he was not the flip-flopper the Republican machine made him out to be. It was asserted that he, on 350 occasions, voted to hike our taxes. In reality, most of those votes were cast to end debate, yea/nay an amendment, or get a bill out of committee and onto the floor.
The lesson: a Senator’s voting record is his/her’s opponent’s greatest weapon. It is the greatest, most abundant source of what an opposition can use to smear their opponent, and afterwards, defend as empirical truth. Governors (and incumbent Presidents) don’t have detailed voting records to be bandied about to contradict their stated views.
Do any of us really think that Hilary could survive this scrutinizing of her Senate votes? Imagine: “Clinton has voted 1000 times for the war and 2000 times against abortion.”
Hypothetically, could McCain stay face after the revealing of his telling voting record? After trying to rub elbows with the Christian right—W. Bush’s current base—Senator McCain’s socially near-liberal views on same-sex marriage and the relation between church and state would be revealed.
Governors are free of such baggage (and of this administration and Congress’ failures), and only sign/veto bills that make it to their desk.
Govs also can rise to legendary status for leading their states through major events or natural disasters. We have seen Jeb Bush’s (R-FL) stock rise after guiding Florida through the last two overly-active hurricane seasons. Mitt Romney scored points for expediting the Olympics in Salt Lake, although he wasn’t Governor then.
Senators are not really the leaders of anything. Sure, they are senior diplomats, but do they lead? Especially in this age where we turn to our President in times of crisis, we want someone who has already dealt with such crises. At this point, the only thing Senators have proved able to do is raising their own pay and sitting in debate about flag burning until their next vacation.
As promised: http://teachers.henrico.k12.va.us/freeman/zanetti_s/jello.jpg
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I am pretty positive that jello cannot be nailed to a wall and that that picture is actually taken looking down at jello sitting on a table or something, with that background. but i still appreciated it after reading the post. which was very educating so i will say very well done. :)
All the more reason to run Obama now, before he gets an actual voting record. The chief opposition to him running is that he doesn't have enough experience. That is precisely what is needed, someone with no voting record!
OBAMA IN 08!
well, danielle, i'm a liberal arts major, i don't know of such things like you science and math types. hehe, surmise as you will.
and erik, my cat doesn't have a voting record. does that mean my cat should run for president? we can't elect someone whose main claims to fame are being young and black. there's a hugggggggge difference between being free from a potentially damning voting record and completely lacking credentials. right now, obama hasn't co-sponsored or led or wrote or done ANYTHING. how could he muster votes on the national level before he's done so with his colleagues in the senate? we can't throw this man into the shark pit, look what happened to edwards. he ran, didn't have the name recognition (derived from accomplishments, i.e. passed legislation), and will never be able to run for such high office again. let's wait on barack, his convention speech gave me chills, and i'm just as invigorated by him as any young non-racist, but i don't want to play this card in our hand too early. he'll be a great leader when he can pin some accolades to his name, with looking at his talent and charisma, shouldn't take long at all.
I'd say obama has some national name recognition. More so than edwards. I dont really follow polotics very closely and I have heard of him. Hes liek senator in Illinois or somethign right? haha
well at least i know his name
but i agree with his lack of expierence he just recently got elected if I remember correctly. And i also think i heard some analyst talking abotu how he will make a strong candidte in about 8 years and that was maybe 2 years go. Meaning he's best off siting this election out.
Don't make me look stupid :p
Chris, I agree with you mostly, I wasn't utterly serious about the Obama in '08 thing, I know that it's considered an impossibility for him to run in all but the most stoned liberal circles. (whoops contributing to sterotyping!).
But I also think that having a voting record is a double-edged sword, and I was trying to make the point that it might not be worth having because of the endless pitfalls (mostly because the average American doesn't understand how senate voting records work.) Your example of how the opposition would display Hilary's (yeah, we're on a first name basis) voting record is exactly what I was getting at.
Although when he does run, I fully support him taking his shirt off in public as many times as possible during the campaign.
yah, i'm pretty sure that we could cover the national debt with a john edwards vs. barack obama kickboxing match. yummy.
yah-i know that you we being tongue in cheek, but i already had the rebuttal lined up in my head, so i figured it'd be a waste not to use it.
and travis, i wouldn't make you look stupid. my friend, you are adorable.
Thanks Chris, I try :p
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/
africa/08/26/kenya.obama.ap/index.html
OBAMA makes me wet.
Look at that, AIDS testing in Africa. The man's like a Tiger. No fear.
Post a Comment