| Previously on TheAngryPen: |
09-12-2000 2 Parties |
08-18-2000 Al’s Acceptance |
08-10-2000 Gore’s Choice |
08-03-2000 The American Dream |
07-20-2000 History and Hollywood |
07-13-2000 40 Acres and a Mule |
07-06-2000 The God We Trust |
06-29-2000 Lyrical Assault |
06-15-2000 Bank Fees |
06-07-2000 A Mixture Often of Incongruous Elements |
05-24-2000 Social Security |
05-17-2000 Governmental Good Intentions |
05-10-2000 Johnny Reb and Disgusting Fatbodies |
05-03-2000 Low Fidelity |
04-26-2000 Jackboots and Black Helicopters |
04-19-2000 Movie Trailers |
04-12-2000 All Things Cuban |
04-05-2000 Censorship |
03-29-2000 Juries and Tobacco |
03-22-2000 Several Things |
03-15-2000 Gore the Reformer |
03-08-2000 Mission to Mars |
03-08-2000 Super Tuesday |
03-03-2000 Little Johnny Murderer |
03-01-2000 Bob Jones |
02-23-2000 The Christian Coalition |
02-16-2000 Valentine's Day |
02-09-2000 Short-Sighted Political Parties |
02-02-2000 Mosh Pits |
01-12-2000 Al Gore's Personality |
11-17-1999 Playboy |
09-02-1999 The Demise of Heavy Metal |
 |
TheAngryPen vs. Short-Sighted Political Parties |
|
|
IF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS were like Senior Proms, this year's theme would be "short-sightedness" and we would all have to wear giant novelty eyeglasses with our pink taffeta dresses and powder-blue tuxedos.
The people of this country are still trying to decide who they want to be the next President of the United States. Unfortunately for them the two major political parties have decided already. And the illusion of our democracy hangs in the balance.
Let's start with the Democrats. Poor Bill Bradley. To the Republican's great relief, he has no chance against the Democratic Party war machine. I don't really know why political parties get behind vice presidents when it comes to nominating their post two-term candidates. It's a big mystery to me. I mean, I understand the theory: The Vice President has been in the public eye for eight years. He's got the connections, he knows the people, the system. He has the current President's ear and, presumably, his endorsement. So why not give him the nomination? But there is a downside to consider.
For instance: how many Presidential candidates, do you think, pick a dynamic, powerful, exciting running-mate for their ticket, one who might overshadow them in the coming campaign? Um...how about ZERO! Any Presidential candidate worth his salt looks a running-mate who is, for lack of a better word, "vanilla." Tolerable to everyone, offensive to no one. Not someone who "will make a good President when I've served my time," but someone who will be a good and loyal representative for their administration, will bang the gavel authoritatively now and again in the Senate, and basically keep their mouth shut. There is no specific reason to believe that, just because a person has been Vice President, that they would by extension, make for an exciting, inspiring, or even competent President.
In fact, there is a lot of empirical evidence to suggest exactly the opposite: Martin Van Buren, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and to a lesser extent, "Alpha" George, come to mind.
The reality is that the Dems are behind Gore because of this bizarre fear of confrontation the parties seem have: as if a contested nomination involving an incumbent vice president would make the party seem fractious and weak. Maybe. But I think the opposite strategy, putting a man in the White House who is maybe not the best person for the job, would wind up having exactly the same effect. Just ask the Republicans, who've spent the last eight years having to knock politely on the White House door, hats in hand, asking for permission to come in, thanks, in large part, to their promoted Vice President from 1988.
Now, speaking of the R's: different situation, same result. Why is George Dubya the front-runner in the Republican primaries? Well yes, the Texas Governor's mansion does have a Brinks truck full of cash sitting out front. But what other reasons do the Republicans give us for their gushing coronation of George as the saviour of the party and the country? I think former challenger Orin Hatch said it all when asked why he was endorsing Bush after ending his own campaign for the nomination. Said Hatch, "He can win."
And there you have it. Not because his ideas are best for the nation. Not because he can close the gap between rich and poor, stabilize Social Security and Medicare, pay down the debt, cut our taxes. No. Because, "he can win."
The facts are these: this election will not be decided by entrenched party constituencies. Richard Nixon once said "You can't win with just the Conservative vote, but you can't win without it either." To which I say, Horse cookies!!! Who did he think Conservatives in 1960 were gonna vote for...Jack Kennedy!? Please.
We already know where those entrenched constituencies stand. Right wing Republicans wouldn't vote for a Democrat if Ronald Reagan himself discovered a cure for Alzheimer's, jumped ship, and ran for the left. Leftie Dems, likewise, wouldn't vote for ANY Republican, even a reincarnated Bill Clinton.
This election will be decided by moderate independents. And independents, as the polls show, are bored with Gore and wary of Bush; The Pen included. (Here's a hint for the Democrats: The Pen might actually consider voting for Bill Bradley, if the alternative were George Bush. Though when it comes to voting Democratic, the Pen suspects that Hell hasn't had a day that cold yet.)
Let me tell you what I believe: there are only two fair fights in this election. Gore v. Bush and Bradley v. McCain. In the other two possible match-ups (with the respective parties' financial juggernauts in full effect, of course), McCain would trounce Gore, and Bradley would stand a decent chance of sending Bush back to Texas $72 million dollars poorer. My question then, is why are both parties blindly backing their presumed front- runners, when a vote for a given party's outsider candidate might cripple the opposition?
Americans are desperate for a reason not to vote for Bush or Gore. So, to all of you in the Party leadership, the Pen says this: C'mon guys, let's give it to them.
Angry Pen out.
Although the Angry Pen has never been wrong, there's a first time for everything. Click here to duke it out with The Pen.
