Saturday, January 31, 2015

No Romney for president in ’16; may we dump all the other recycled dreams?

Call me relieved to learn Friday that Mitt Romney has no intention of actually running for the Republican nomination for president in the 2016 election cycle.

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.


No comments: