The Republican Reality Show

Nick Gillespie makes a good point about the Republican presidential candidates. He does not say, as others have, that the latest foray into Iowa looked more like a reality television show than a pre-presidential primary, but he has identified a serious problem.

Unfortunately, he undermines his own argument by calling certain prospective candidates: “schmucks.” Whatever their deficiencies as candidates, they are accomplished professionals in fields outside of politics. They are surely not schmucks. By insulting them Gillespie makes himself look foolish.

Beginning with the observation that her performance in Iowa ensured that Sarah Palin will not be a viable candidate, Gillespie goes on to mix astute analysis with gratuitous insults:

So America’s most-famous snowbilly [Palin] is out of the running for the 2016 Republican nomination. But what about all the other manifestly unqualified novices, jackasses, and publicity hounds that surface every four years when the GOP starts fishing for someone/anyone that can beat whatever sad sack of chum the Democrats toss in the water?

Unlike the Democrats, who never stray far from career politicians when selecting a presidential candidate, Republicans always seem to be looking for some sort of otherworldly savior to waltz in and take the country by storm. Someone unsullied by, you know, much (if any) actual experience in holding office, winning elections, and governing on a daily basis. Though GOP voters typically end up selecting major-state governors (Reagan, Bush II) or long-serving, partly mummified senators (Dole, McCain), they spend a hell of a lot time in primary season dancing with some pretty strange suitors.

Some of the candidates are clearly vanity candidates. But they are not jackasses. Many are successful businessmen, businesswomen or professionals. But they are not even remotely qualified to run for the office of the presidency of the United States. An act of God could not put them in the White House.

To be fair and balanced, the current Democratic president brought nothing to the office. He had no experience and no qualifications for the job. True enough, he was a politician and a United States Senator, but, beyond that… nothing.

In the meantime vanity candidates are making the Republican Party look less than serious.

Gillespie writes:

In the past, Republicans have coalesced around such obvious joke candidates as businessman Herman Cain, whose main achievements involved management stints at two of the nation’s most grotesque fast-food chains (Burger King and Godfather’s Pizza), and Alan Keyes, whose resume includes a brief stint as a Reagan appointee to the reviled-by-conservatives United Nations, hosting an ironically titled MSNBC show (Alan Keyes Is Making Sense), and a historic loss to one Barack Obama in the 2004 Illinois Senate race.

That Cain and Keyes are black is no accident. While the GOP struggles to crack double digits in terms of votes from African Americans, the party’s overwhelmingly white membership seems to have an unending appetite for high-profile, successful black men whose very presence on a debate stage softens charges of hostility and indifference to issues about race. This helps explain why The Weekly Standard is officially “Taking Ben Carson Seriously,” as Fred Barnes’ recent cover story puts it.

Herman Cain was a successful businessman. Ben Carson was a great neurosurgeon. Neither has any business presenting himself as a candidate for the presidency. If neither man knows any better, then surely Republican voters should. And Fred Barnes should certainly know that he diminishes the Republican’s chances for victory when he starts taking Ben Carson seriously as a presidential candidate.

Gillespie continues:

Unlike the Democrats, who never stray far from career politicians when selecting a presidential candidate, Republicans always seem to be looking for some sort of otherworldly savior to waltz in and take the country by storm. Someone unsullied by, you know, much (if any) actual experience in holding office, winning elections, and governing on a daily basis. Though GOP voters typically end up selecting major-state governors (Reagan, Bush II) or long-serving, partly mummified senators (Dole, McCain), they spend a hell of a lot time in primary season dancing with some pretty strange suitors.

It is not quite nice to call Bob Dole and John McCain “mummified,” but unfortunately, that is the way they appeared to the American public. Surely, they both had the requisite experience, but both seemed to be largely past their prime.

For reasons that escape me Gillespie neglects to mention the last Republican who won the presidency twice, G. W. Bush.

You might think, as I do that Mitt Romney was far more experienced than Barack Obama. He had more executive experience and more political experience.

And yet, Gillespie says, he did not seem to have a taste for governance. Worse yet, he was doomed by the nominating process, process that did not make the Republican party look very serious. Romney came across as nasty and negative. He was the last man standing, but he alienated many Republican and independent voters. Surely, Romney did not know how to run a national political campaign:

Perhaps it’s the analogue to the longstanding and still-potent jibe that Republicans don’t really want to govern. They disdain the political process to such a degree that it takes them forever to pull the switch for a politician. Even the 2012 nominee Mitt Romney was touted more for his supposed business acumen as a turnaround specialist at Bain Capital than he was for his record as governor of Massachusetts. I’d argue, too, that Romney’s refusal to stand for reelection as governor in 2006 mirrored his party’s damaging dislike of politics. If you want to be president but can’t be bothered to actually learn how to govern, well good luck with that.

As it happens, beyond Sarah Palin and Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina and Donald Trump, Republicans have a very good field of candidates:

On the GOP side, there is a fistful of governors ranging from Chris Christie to Bobby Jindal to Jeb Bush to Scott Walker. There are young, energetic senators such as Marco Rubio and Rand Paul, who either have considerable legislative experience at the state level or have already demonstrated seriousness of purpose by sponsoring important legislation.

But, if it puts on something that looks more like a reality show than a nominating process, the Republican party will disrespect voters and disrespect the country.

Gillespie concludes:

If history is any guide, Republicans will prevaricate as long as possible and make goo-goo eyes at candidates who have no meaningful experience and no real shot at winning the presidency. That’s their right. It’s a free country after all. But the longer they wait to get serious about vetting their party’s candidates for president, the more they will lose support among the independent voters who will decide the 2016 election. And if they lose them, they will only have themselves to blame, regardless of who the Democrats put up to run.

I hesitate to say it, but Gillespie should find out what the word “prevaricate” means. It looks like something he fished out of a thesaurus. And, he should find himself a better editor.