Full disclosure. Perhaps (hopefully) unlike most of you, I watch a lot of TV news, in particular political commentary. If that sounds like an AA confessional perhaps that's intended, because like alcohol it's a lot of wasted calories and brain cells. And it's actually the main reason I started the Blog, because I was tired of hearing the majority of the talking heads (or "surrogates", in politico-speak) parrot the talking points of their candidate's campaign. Rarely is there a real discussion of policy pros and cons, which may perversely be a good thing, because as it stands no one is really watching anyways, why go ahead and make a bad product even worse by putting people to sleep.
So the blog is my take on the crazy known as American politics. And my first truism: in the absence of rules, there are no holds barred. None. Nada. Falsehoods, personal attacks, non-sequitur innuendo, it's all cool. And similarly, the goal is very simple. Win. No prizes for second place, no participation trophies. Yea, sure, losses can be spun, and even can be used as ammunition for future battles, but winning right now at all costs is the way the game is played. That's a statement, not a moral judgement.
This week I found myself sucked into the "who's going to be the VP" game (both sides), as that was the topic-of-the-week on political TV. Loyal readers of the blog (all 5 of you, thanks!) can look back at my earlier VP predictions, Chris Christie on the GOP side and probably Tim Kaine for the Democrats, along with some conventional sort of justification for both. That's probably logical, which, in retrospect, is probably wrong. Here's why.
Nobody got famous or won anything by telegraphing their intentions to the world, and in this lovely political season that seems more true than usual. So yea, maybe what the Donald says about wanting a "Washington insider" for VP is true and maybe it kinda makes sense, but, gentle reader, think of it this way. Name two times this season when Donald Trump has said something either true or made sense? So I'm beginning to suspect his VP pick won't make the trifecta. Same for Hillary. Tim Kaine is a great pick, if I do say so myself, but the sands are shifting so rapidly I think Clinton-world has to look at the world as it is right now and deal with the progressive hand that Bernie is dealing them. Either way, as I mentioned, the goal is simple. Be in it to win it. So here's what you didn't hear on Meet The Press:
Who does Trump choose for VP, and why? Okay, before the big reveal, who will it NOT be: Condoleezza Rice. Please people, really. She's smart, he's not, and she doesn't need that. Hell, she's much more likely to be the first female president, not VP of The Apprentice. So "true conservatives", it ain't gonna happen, but you'll like my pick, perhaps even more. Drum roll please. To give a Trump campaign and presidency the necessary gravitas and political street cred to play with the big dogs, he would simply win if he can get David Petraeus (US Army, ret.) to be his VP. Boom. Mic drop. Game over. I don't think this makes Trump competitive. I think it makes him President. Sorry haters, I'm just observing. If this pick needs 'splainin, carry on. War hero, an Eisenhower/Schwarzkoph/Powell for our time. Universal respect from our allies (and others) on the international stage. Politically astute, and media savvy. How do the Democrats attack him? But most importantly, in terms of "why in God's name would he even consider the job?", just one word. Unemployed. Pencil it in. He accepts, Trump wins. As much as I'd like to see Christie throwing rhetorical fire bombs on the campaign trail, Petraeus brings the A game to a GOP sorely needing legitimacy.
Okay, it that last paragraph was depressing for Democrats, let's move on. Given the somewhat unexpected early conclusion to the GOP race, the Democrats are facing the reality of competing in the first reality TV general election campaign, against essentially the Bill Clinton (ie naturally gifted womanizer) of popular culture. So yea, they can go ahead a choose a respected and sound politician, well versed in legislation and government, and in doing so can lose and lose badly, or they can get in the game and play to the voting populace. Scanning the globe for a left-leaning populist who can energize the base and draw independents to the voting booths, the name I initially dismissed out of hand now rises to the forefront. Could Hillary choose Bernie Sanders to be her running mate? Would he accept? I'm thinking yes, and while it could be effective for the reasons I mention, it wouldn't be near the strong card a GOP VP pick like Petraeus would make. Why would Bernie say "yes"? In his negotiations he could get assurances for policy positions he wouldn't get simply by getting a voice at the convention, and it would be the highest profile he could reasonably expect to achieve in government. So if it's offered I think he'd say yes. It would lock up a fair number of the Bernie army that might otherwise defect to Clinton, especially if Bernie is allowed to push some of his populist policies (except break up the big banks. Goldman says "uh, no").
The blog is full of conjecture and opinion, but sometimes I like to sprinkle a few facts in there to keep it real. Factually, and including this time, the Presidency has been the Democrats to lose. The coalitions that typically vote Democratic give them just about 215 of the 270 electoral votes needed to win the presidency. But, if you believe that history is a accurate predictor of the future then you haven't been paying attention this year. In respect to that numerical Democratic advantage, however, it did occur to me in, the postscript to the GOP campaign, that despite the many misgivings about their presumptive candidate, he really is was the only candidate that has at least a reasonable chance in winning the Presidency, by blowing up the typical model and rewriting the script. The next few weeks, leading up to the GOP convention, will be telling to see if the remainder of the establishment GOP will accept the rewriting of their failed conservative playbook, and if any edits they might suggest will be accepted by their Presidential candidate. But at this point, Trump is holding most of the cards in this hand.
Thanks for reading, have a great week. We'll be back with novel ideas and inflammatory opinions real soon!
No comments:
Post a Comment