June 20, 2016

My crazy political fantasy: What if the 2016 election were Kasich vs. O'Malley?

No pleasure and no pain. No thrills. No anxieties. Just blandness against blandness. Wouldn't it be wonderful?

How do you feel about the fantasy alternative 2016 election, Kasich vs. O'Malley?
 
pollcode.com free polls

53 comments:

Jack Wayne said...

Blah - absurd - both are terrible and not what I want.

Nonapod said...

Not thrilled about either of those, but I guess I'd prefer Kasich to Trump.

Wishing upon a star won't help us choose which bowl of shit we have to eat, or make either one of them taste any better.

buwaya puti said...

You like having your life or death political conflicts hidden under a camouflage of blandness?
Come now.
All these people, bland or Trump, are figureheads. You arent electing one person but a clique, a very large one, in fact a social class in itself. This is difficult to grasp, so people naturally personalize. This is a serious defect in democracy.
A proper election contest is one where the figurehead accurately represents the clique. I cant think of a recent US election with a clearer representation than this one.

mikee said...

Well, in Bizarro World, it is the losers of the elections who attain office.

Here on Earth, O'Malley, who "reduced" crime rates in Baltimore as mayor by ordering police to change the way they reported crimes, is just another lying, power-mongering scum politician in the best Maryland tradition, going back to Agnew in my lifetime.

Kasich? How is he gonna win anything? By boring people into voting for him? Kasich is a prime example of the guy you want running something important, like the city maintenance department, where corruption needs to be avoided and everyone has to do some bit of work every day.

David said...

" I love the insurance that nothing awful happens."

I chose this because it involves the highest level of fantasy and self delusion. Seems that is what elections are for nowadays. Kind of like playing the lottery for the daydream about wealth.

AprilApple said...

I know.
Is there a way Hillary and Trump can both lose?

Alexander said...

No anxieties? For all the shit one can point out about Hillary - and there's enough to overflow a medium-sized city's sewage system - two things she never did were be the Mayor of Baltimore or the Governor of Maryland.

At a time when we face an existential crisis due to demographics, O'Malley ran in a year when he's quite arguably a worse candidate than Hillary.

Which, I suspect, is why the DNC chose him as the fall guy to maintain the pretense that it wasn't a coronation.

mockturtle said...

In another era, perhaps, but not now.

Terry said...

O'Malley is the kind of guy who believes that if you hire ten people to do one person's job, you are making the economy more productive. It's possible that Trump believes that as well.

AReasonableMan said...

Bush Jr was a former governor. Hard to imagine how much more could have gone wrong.

chuck said...

O'Malley? No answer captures the weirdness that is O'Malley.

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Henry said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
buwaya puti said...

To reiterate, even if Hilary and Donald both lose, SOMEBODY will be making policy in the executive agencies and oppressing the people. Does it matter so much how they appear on TV?
I know that you must take into account how they appear to others on TV, but if you can think on this level you can also separate appearances from reality.

Henry said...

What if the 2016 election was Lincoln Chaffee vs. Rand Paul? Then I'd have a real choice.

Fabi said...

Which one is the Republican? I don't think it's Kasich.

Lauderdale Vet said...

That was part of the attractiveness of Walker, to me. He looked boring and super-competent.

I was hoping for whole lot of that after this administration.

It doesn't seem to be what America is looking for these days.

Hagar said...

buwaya puti is right.

J. D. said...

This would be terrible for everyone but media companies who sell adds to candidates. "Bland," I assume means they neither candidate would he particularly objectionable to the other party, which reminds me of the Alan Simpson line about bipartisanship. "In America we have two parties, the stupid party asked the evil party. I am a proud member of the stupid party. Once in a while the two parties get together to do something both stupid she evil, and we call that bipartisanship."

Ficta said...

I live in Maryland. Dear God, not O'Malley. I'd take Hillary over O'Malley. Ugh.

dreams said...

I'd vote for Hillary before I'd vote for a liberal Dem who has already proven that he is just another incompetent like all the blue state governors.

Michael K said...

"Hard to imagine how much more could have gone wrong."

It's nice to see we are back to normal, ARM. I was getting uneasy about how much we agreed upon.

AJ Lynch said...

Two insiders - not what I want in the next president.

Trump should be emphasizing everyday that he is the outsider and he should be mocking daily the failed insiders including Obama, Hillary and Biden [who has never missed a govt paycheck in the last 45 years].

Michael K said...

"Trump should be emphasizing everyday that he is the outsider "

Yup.

Achilles said...

Our problems now stem from a federal bureaucracy that dominates our lives. We have to give them a large amount of money if we are productive. If we don't it is by gaming the system and favorable carve outs. They are controlling curriculum in schools. They are suing police departments. At least half of a businesses overhead costs are directed at compliance. They are telling people where they can build housing and what kind of housing they have to build.

We need someone to be president who lived under their thumb rather than someone who helped it grow.

AJ Lynch said...

What Achilles said at 10:28AM

Chuck said...

So the current Althouse poll reflects 23% against this hypothetical, because they really want a Trump election.

And the rest, living in reality.

If this were a Republican primary, Trump might call this a victory. But with a solid 23% (or 33%, or 43%) of the national electorate supporting him, Trump is heading for the biggest choke-job, the worst schlonging in modern American history.

eric said...

No such thing. The media would turn Kasich into Hitler.

Rumpletweezer said...

Never thought I'd actually say this, but O'Malley was the least insane candidate on the Dem side.

Hagar said...

What we have may be Goldman Sachs vs. borrowers for non-PC purposes.

Harold said...

Wonderful. A choice between two democrats. How lovely. Everyone's dream come true.

Seeing the election thrown to the house would be much more entertaining. Here's hoping a third party will take a state or two.

PrincetonAl said...

So, where is the option "Bad! Yes, I dislike the really bad choices I have now vs. really bad, and boring choices instead."

.. or ...

"Bad! Yes, I dislike the corrupt democrat vs. democrat-lite anti-immigration ('Build a wall!') choice I have now, but how is it better if I pick boring democrat technocrat vs. soon-to-be-corrupt open borders stooge democrat-lite?"

Not much of a choice.

Clayton Hennesey said...

That's one way to force ISIS to concentrate on Finland instead.

J. D. said...

Chuck,

Trump doesn't need people to love voting do him, he just needs to be better than Hillary. Personally, I don't like Trump, but of the remaining options he's my second choice right now. I plan to vote Libertarian (though Messrs. Johnson and Weld are doing their best to lose my vote), but I wouldn't fear a Trump presidency. After Trump, I would go for literally every other American running for president or eligible for the presidency and unincarcerated before Hillary. All Trump needs is to be the better choice than Kodos.

rcocean said...

O'Malley got 1% and Kasich won 1 state - his own.

Kasich vs. O'Malley would be a race between someone who wants society to go Left and someone who wants it to go left at a slightly slower pace.

mikee said...

Well, in Bizarro World, it is the losers of the elections who attain office.

Here on Earth, O'Malley, who "reduced" crime rates in Baltimore as mayor by ordering police to change the way they reported crimes, is just another lying, power-mongering scum politician in the best Maryland tradition, going back to Agnew in my lifetime.

Kasich? How is he gonna win anything? By boring people into voting for him? Kasich is a prime example of the guy you want running something important, like the city maintenance department, where corruption needs to be avoided and everyone has to do some bit of work every day.

Johanna Lapp said...

Some say the world will end in accidental nuclear holocaust
Some say in a nuclear winter of infinite boredom.
I hold with those who favor fire.

Terry said...

"Bush Jr was a former governor."
Do you realize that Bill Clinton was also a former governor, ARM?

Rob McLean said...

"Bland," I assume means they neither candidate would he particularly objectionable to the other party

To the Left, anyone who's not a liberal Democrat is automatically "particularly objectionable". If Kasich were the nominee, the media would be going through his garbage and running stories about he bullied somebody in junior high school, and the Dems would be calling him a racist every minute of every day.

bagoh20 said...

Kinda like James Buchanan vs Neville Chamberlain.

What could go wrong?

Deirdre Mundy said...

Kasich v. O'Malley = Kasich wins. I'd take that in a heartbeat. Not my favorite candidate ever, but.... better than either option on tap.

Danno said...

Blogger Rumpletweezer said...Never thought I'd actually say this, but O'Malley was the least insane candidate on the Dem side.

I would say that Jim Webb was the best Dem that entered the primaries.

My name goes here. said...

Quirky vs. Smirky

shiloh said...

Much like your crazy political fantasy 4 years ago!

Static Ping said...

Governors are preferable because they have executive experience and therefore have a better grasp of the job responsibility. Senators have the bad habit of growing pains in office. However, this does not mean that a governor is automatically going to be a "safe" pick. Jimmy Carter was, apparently, a good governor but a terrible President.

O'Malley has nothing to sell. His administration of Maryland was hardly encouraging to the point that a deeply blue state replaced him with a Republican over his chosen successor. If he was not handsome and charismatic, he would not even be in the discussion. I'm not even sure if I would prefer him over Hillary and I loathe Hillary.

Kasich would be a fine candidate if he was running as a Democrat. As a Republican, not so much. I'd take him over Hillary.

Unknown said...

I would say that Jim Webb was the best Dem that entered the primaries.

...

Not the least insane, however.

And Shiloh Stuart from MAD TV checks in. Mommy mommy mommy!

vicari valdez said...

i think the desire for an 'outsider' candidate and big sweeping changes starts with obama's candidacy, because obama was such a novel candidate. the novelty of his candidacy led to palin as a vp candidate, led to bernie, led to trump.

i personally see a lot of similarities in what people want/think they're going to get out of a trump presidency and what people wanted/thought they were going to get from an obama presidency. on both sides you see people drawing wild conclusions from pretty shallow rhetoric. and with both i see a sort of 'lottery effect' where people don't really know exactly what they're going to get if their candidate wins, but nevertheless there's still a lot of hoping and feeling that things will change to their benefit. while on the other side of the fence, people are terrified at the prospect of the 'novel' candidate. it's pretty interesting to watch.

Oso Negro said...

Of course, Althouse. Comfortable Democrat versus comfortable Democrat.

Jim said...

Kasich would still be the second coming of Adolf Hitler. Since 1976 I've voted GOP for President. Except for Bush 1 and Ford they were all Hitler. Ford was the best athlete we've ever had as President and Chevy Chase played him as clumsy. Bush 1 was smart enough to run the CIA, and SNL played him as stupid.

Michael K said...

"We need someone to be president who lived under their thumb rather than someone who helped it grow."

Yes and Trump has negotiated with the city and state of New York.

After that, Putin is friendly.

EMD said...

You want relatively sensible Governors?

Vote Johnson/Weld, Professor.

Harold said...

William Weld. Eminently sensible. Only governor in U.S. history to appoint an official state astrologer. Given the chance, I'm sure he'll do his best to bring the entire U.S. and not just Massachusetts to the forefront of 16th century science.

Not voting for that ticket.

Harold said...

"Bush 1 was smart enough to run the CIA, and SNL played him as stupid."

Both father and son were intelligent and skilled enough to fly airplanes. And land them safely. And both were portrayed as unintelligent.

Whenever I hear a democrat claim one of them was stupid, I ask what planes they're qualified to fly. And half of them are uninformed enough to have no idea why I'm asking.