Now
if we could only get all the other past presidential candidates to give up
their fantasies of working in the Oval Office someday and focus attention on
trying to find someone new and forward thinking, then perhaps there’s a chance
that Election ’16 won’t turn out to be a complete dud.
THAT
ACTUALLY IS the sense I’m picking up at this admittedly early juncture about
the people who want to succeed Barack Obama when he leaves the White House in
early 2017.
A
batch of rejects whom we didn’t think much of before, but who seem to have
nothing better to do with themselves than make another bid for the highest
office.
Apparently,
it didn’t register with them when we, the people who make up the electorate,
told them “No!!!!!” before.
They
seem to think that if we see them once again, we’ll somehow think they’re more
qualified than when they ran before.
WHEN
REALLY, THESE repeat candidates remind me of the debate that often takes place
when reviewing former professional ballplayers year after year after year for possible
inclusion in the Baseball Hall of Fame.
The
player’s statistics don’t somehow magically improve in his athletic retirement.
He’s no more qualified for Hall of Fame admission 20 years after he retires than
he was when he was first eligible five years after retiring.
So
when I look at polls with names such as “Huckabee,” “Paul,” “Perry” and “Santorum”
on the Republican side, I think the same thing I felt for the possibility of a
Romney campaign.
“You
lost!” and “Get on with your life.” There’s nothing new about any of you that
the public at-large didn’t previously dismiss. Your perennial presidential
aspirations have become about as pathetic as the fifteen years that one-time
Detroit Tigers and Minnesota Twins pitcher Jack Morris kept cropping up on the
Hall of Fame ballot – only to fall short every single time!
I
DON’T THINK much higher of the possible campaigns of the governors of New
Jersey, Louisiana and Wisconsin – all of whom have hinted they might prefer
D.C. to their respective Statehouse scenes.
But
at least they’d be fresh faces of people to consider for the Republican
nomination for president. So I really don’t want to hear anything about
one-time Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin either!
Before
any of you try to dismiss this as the rant of someone who just isn’t interested
in Republicans, I have to admit to feeling something similar for the
possibility of Hillary R. Clinton as president.
For
what it’s worth, she had her serious bid for the White House in 2008, and she
fell short. She came oh so close, but failed to win the Democratic nomination.
Do we really need a repeat?
ALTHOUGH
I WONDER if from the perspective of developing a political legacy, she achieved
more in a career that saw her serve as a senator from New York and as secretary
of state than she would have had if she had become president.
After
all, she wound up gaining some respect for her performance in those roles,
whereas if she had become president she merely would have become the target for
all the ideological buffoons who hated her husband as president and would have
been determined to “take her down” too.
Having
to speculate about whether Hillary will run again for president is merely a
reminder that the Democratic Party doesn’t seem to have anyone else with enough
ambition to want the top post in federal government.
Particularly
since the one candidate whom some Dems are eager to see challenge Hillary in a
primary (Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.) has already hinted she’s probably not
interested in doing so.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment