Has the national platform and exposure to launch a strong campaign, but lacks the communication skills and political instincts to capitalize on it. Going nowhere.Ow.
I'm glad to get a chance to think about 22 individuals instead of the 8 or so that usually cross my mind. (Hey, Condi's not on his list.) But I must say looking at 22 doesn't make me feel any better. I don't really like anyone. I never do. It's nice to have 22, but I'm still feeling bad that this is all we have -- the usual collection of governors and senators. I'll need to see real campaigns and get used to the characters that actually manage to go forward before I can tolerate the image of any of them as President.
The piece is titled "Circling the White House." Is he calling them vultures (and Bush dead)?
पोस्ट्स
२० टिप्पण्या:
As I see it, most of the pessemism comes from seeing too many candidates from either party say one thing, then, when elected, do another. It's a low trust factor. I no longer trust any politician. Especially those who've been in office as long as some of these yahoo's have.
Said it before and will say it again...McCain/Gingrich '08 might be the way to go.
We just had 23 people run for mayor, but in the end, it came down to the two entirely predictable candidates, the incumbent and the lieutenant governor. The benefit of the crowded field, minus the cranks (my favorite: Manny "Chevrolet" Bruno, "A Troubled Man for Troubled Times"), was that we had a few robust debates, with credible people throwing out ideas and challenging status quo policies. I don't recall a time in my town where politics has been so widely discussed in public meeting areas, with such interest and vitality.
my biggest concern after reading that is that I have no inclination to like ANY of the democrats on the list.
This is a weird article. In New York, everybody assumes that Guiliani is running, and nobody thinks that Pataki is running. I think that everybody agrees that Guiliani has the best leadership skills of anybody in the field; I can really see him being president. However, beyond his liberal social positions, he also had that recent messy divorce/adultery thing that was a non-scandal in New York, but might create electibility issues in the red states. Warner is a joke -- he's a straight-up racist. If he runs, he'll hand the Democrats Florida on a silver platter.
Far too often, Republicans pronounce the words "pro-gun control" and "pro gay rights" as if they rhyme with "huge pussy." I'd like to think that, if Rudy ran, they wouldn't be able to get away with that garbage. Then again, I never thought they'd be able to make W. look like more of a war hero than the silver star, bronze star, and purple heart-winning John Kerry, but they somehow tricked the public into believing it.
Saying that Gingrich is untainted by the current mess in Washington is true, but disingenuous. There were a lot of ethics charges brought against him and his Tom DeLay, JC Watts and Ron Livingston were among his top lieutenants. While he was the Speaker of the House, his promotion of the Lewinsky investigation as a major campaign theme in 1998 resulted in the biggest political victory for a sixth-year president in US history. I think the Republicans would make a big mistake if they nominated him.
Seven: "what do you expect? The usual collection of governors and senators is a good thing, not a bad thing."
It's what I expect. I have gotten used to it over the years. It's just dreary. Not that I want excitement. That would probably be worse.
(Written before I read Sippican's comment, which I agree with.)
Why are more of the democratic likelys senators? Senators are inherently inelectible as President. Of the 11 on the list, I'd say Vilsack is the best candidate.
I like Gingrich as a politician: he is entertaining, and fairly consistent in his platform (which I disagree with). But he has the morals of a horny hermaphroditic slug. Do I really want to see attack commercials with him forcing his ailing wife to sign divorce papers? No. Thank. You. He would make a great Cabinet member, I agree. HHS, or something like that. The absence of Condi on the list is odd.
Where's Colin Powell on the lists?
vw: zozoz
Sippican, you are onto something. It was exactly the ordinariness of most of the people in the field that made this a good experience. Some had public recognition from previous endeavors, and others were simply decent folks who said "I'd like to serve." They did the job of putting issues on the table, basically. And it was the case as well in most of our council races. Boring, but decent, folks. The mayor's run-off was, as I said, predictable. But some of our council seats changed hands, and the people elected, or now in a run-off, may offer a little relief from the politics of personalities and political machines. Time will tell.
Sippican, by the way: I thought about you yesterday at the Jazz and Heritage Festival. You would have passed a good time! We started with Native American dancing and drumming, then to Cuban dance music, and later to Long Tall Marcia Ball (funky, roadhouse piano diva). Much food later, we spent 5 minutes watching Chris Owens, who defies description. Can you imagine a 70-year-old Madonna/Tina Turner cross, with drag queen style? After her, some Mardi Gras Indians reminding us that we won't kneel down, not on the ground. The best ended the day, Angelique Kidjo, an African jazz/fusion singer with a fantastic band made up of players from all over Africa, Brazil and the Caribbean. Sunday, we're going back. Fats Domino is closing the festival.
Sippican, how'd you know? Those are the two top priorities. There is talk of filling potholes, too. Oh, and coming up with a good evacuation plan. That's on the list there somewhere. Maybe that's the fancy part?
Marcia had her red beans cookin', that's all I need to say about that.
I suspect at this stage, the question in the GOP will be whether a not-McCain candidate on his right can clear out the rest and turn it into a two horse race fast enough to draw on the significant anti-McCain feeling out there. If a bunch of people stay viable for a while, it will be McCain and the Seven Dwarfs. If one dwarf can off the rest, McCain could be in for a big battle.
Cook's point that ability to win counts is true, but anyone who can clear the decks for a mano a mano with McCain will look very capable of winning to the conservative wing of the GOP.
The GOP candidates perceived to be left of McCain (Giuliani, Pataki, Rice) have no chance because conservatives will take McCain ahead of them. (Giuliani and Rice would be very interesting Veep considerations, although Lindsay Graham may already have that wrapped up with McCain.)
Of the ones to the right of McCain, do I see anyone in that bunch that looks likely to emerge from the pack? Not yet. Frist and Allen are too dull; Gingrich has way too much baggage for either spot on the ticket (Cabinet is a grand idea for him). Romney is very interesting, but can he get enough traction? Huckabee and Hegel are even more obscure, and Brownback looks too much like a one note symphony. (I'm not sure that is fair; I just believe the perception will hurt Brownback a lot).
I like Rudy best out of all those names, and he is indeed a terrific speaker. And I'm glad he's not anti-gay and doesn't wanna make abortion illegal. For some of us that's a plus, although granted it could be a minus in GOP primaries.
Terry wrote: he also had that recent messy divorce/adultery thing that was a non-scandal in New York, but might create electibility issues in the red states.
Was it a non-scandal in New York? It seemed to be a big deal in NY's media at the time, although I guess it didn't damage him much in the end. As far as in a 2008 campaign, I don't think it would be that big a deal. It's old news and there's nothing about it that makes it rise to a public matter (no perjury, etc), and it would probably make the media or a political opponant look worse than Rudy if they were trying to beat him up over it. It could end up working in his favor if others tried to make it a major issue. (Although I guess they sometimes prefer to do whisper campaigns...so I dunno....)
Marital troubles are common, people have lots of empathy as long as they're not lied to, and because it's old news it mostly serves to make him seem more human. Touchy issues in someone's backround don' always end up hurting someone like people assume. It all depends on how they're handled. You have to make people like you and relate to youin a presidential campaign, and people often like flawed people more because of their flaws. But I could be wrong..... :)
Sippican, she's still kinda hot. If you recall, she has her own style. She's got legs for days, and plays with one slung over the other at the knee, leaning front toward the audience. I have no idea how she does the pedals, but she's moving the whole time, so it must work! I'm back out there tomorrow, for the closing day. I'll enjoy a beer in your name. If you're not busy, tune in to some streaming audio at wwoz.org; they broadcast from the festival throughout the day. By the way, my friends from Dorchester are in for the week. They think the politics here are mighty familiar.
I'd like to see Chuck Hagel get the Republican nomination for President in 2008. He's strong on foreign policy and has some distance from President Bush on the troublesome issues.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा