SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: JohnM who wrote (8608)9/19/2003 9:36:31 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) of 793699
 
A cynical note from the "TNR Blog"

CONSIDERING THERE ARE 49 DEMOCRATIC SENATORS, COUNT US LUCKY THEY AREN'T ALL RUNNING: Now there are ten Democratic presidential contenders, and a minimum of nine must lose. This means at least nine of the contenders appear to be wasting their own time and everyone else's time, plus wasting millions of dollars. So why do they do it? Recently I put the question to a Renown Political Consultant whose name must be withheld in the interest of the person's future employment prospects. The reply went like this:

First, to the extent the candidates are United States senators (four are), caution-contents-under-pressure egotism is the driving factor. It matters not that it has been 43 years since a senator was elected president. All senators consider themselves Great Men -- substitute Women where appropriate--and of equal importance, all senators consider all competing senators Bloated Gasbags. So when Senator A declares for the presidency, 99 other senators instantly think, Him? I'm better than him! Senators endlessly run, and endlessly lose, because they cannot stand the thought that some other senator views himself as more qualified.

Second, the Renown Political Consultant went on, a presidential campaign is a lottery ticket. No one knows who will win; "expert" forecasts are almost always wrong. All current Democratic contenders are keenly aware that at this point in 1992, George H. W. Bush looked unbeatable; a year later he lost to a small-state governor with bimbo baggage, while party heavyweights stayed out of the race. So why not buy a ticket? Considering that you yourself do not pay the price of the ticket--your campaign donors do that--why not?

Sounds persuasive. I'll add the third reason, general to all the candidates, which is that running for president allows a person to spend the year pretending he or she actually is president.

You give speeches every day full of phrases likes, "When I am president of the United States--" Reporters ask your position on issues, and hang on your every word of reply. Not because they care about your reply, rather, they are hoping you will slip up and commit some gaffe they can mock; but at any rate, you experience the sensation of reporters hanging on your every word, just as they do for the actual president. So long as your fundraising holds out, you get to fly around the country issuing orders to obedient staffers, and speaking to audiences about how your administration will rapidly solve all problems and bring peace to the Middle East. You get to somberly say to your advisors, spouse or mistress things like, "Let's convene a panel of experts to advise me on the Tajikistan pipeline issue." Every day you are introduced at least once as "the next president of the United States!" This is all very ego-gratifying and, though strenuous, a nice diversion from actual work.

tnr.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext