 |
| Gertrude Stein (1874-1946) Prescient Analyst of 21st-Century Politics |
Biden’s performance so far has been underwhelming in both policy and political terms, albeit better than the most logical other choice for a 2024 run, Kamala Harris, whom Hillary Clinton described as lacking the political instincts to win primaries. She also polls, as of this writing at a -13.5% approval rating, which is even worse than Biden’s -9.1%.
The only good news for Democrats is that former President Trump, who is perceived by many as the most likely GOP candidate, is worse still, at -15.9%.
The other three Republicans whose names have been most bandied about—Ron DeSantis, Ted Cruz, and Greg Abbott—are nearly as repulsive as Trump. Curmie would vote for the Sauron/Voldemort ticket over any of that quartet. Perhaps there’s a latter-day Nelson Rockefeller or a pre-sellout John McCain out there somewhere? Curmie isn’t holding his breath.
And who do the Democrats have to offer? We start by eliminating Harris, a lightweight who shows little interest, let alone competency, at anything other than advancing the career of Kamala Harris. Biden, whose presidency hasn’t been quite as bad as Curmie’s Republican friends would argue, has still been “meh” on his good days. Plus, he’s 80 now, and neither his mental acuity nor voters’ confidence in it is likely to improve over the next 21 months.
Age is a particular problem for Democrats. Hillary Clinton is 75, John Kerry is 79, Elizabeth Warren is 73, Bernie Sanders is 81, Nancy Pelosi is 82, Sherrod Brown is 70, Chuck Schumer is 72, Henry Cisneros is 75… even Amy Klobuchar is 61, but she’s at least sane and not yet on Medicare, making her a potential front-runner. (Curmie would be inclined to support her, at the moment.)
Could Hakeem Jeffries (52) develop into a viable candidate? Perhaps, but he certainly doesn’t have a lot of name recognition right now. Gavin Newsome is 55, but his principal attributes seem to be that he is tall and good-looking; plus, he’s from California, which is regarded by a fair share of the country as something of a lunatic asylum. Curmie doesn’t see a lot of gravitas in Cory Booker (53), but there’s at least some possibility he’s not a male version of Kamala Harris.
Pete Buttigieg is only 41, but his performance as Secretary of Transportation has been, well, “less than impressive” would be the polite way of saying it. Beto O’Rourke (50), who has made a career out of losing statewide races to unpopular Republicans, is the Democrats’ version of Paul Ryan: an over-hyped mediocrity who somehow gets positive press coverage.
And don’t get Curmie started on “The Squad,” now up to nine members, ranging in age from 33 to 49. None of them would make a good President (at least yet), but that’s okay, because none would stand a chance of winning, either.
As Gertrude Stein said of Oakland, there is no there, there. Does the party turn, as some have suggested, to the likes of Michelle Obama (59)? The party could do worse, but it’s difficult to see someone that inexperienced being the nominee.
The problem here is not that the Democrats might lose the next election; it’s that the Republicans might win. And, alas, vice versa.
But the country has survived some pretty awful Presidents of both parties—Curmie would say the best grade of the last eight would be a B-, and there are a couple of D- grades that are that high only because the country was still standing when they left office. So the stakes are high, but it’s not yet time to move to Canada or fling yourself off a bridge.
As one of the few folks in the country to have been registered to vote in both New Hampshire and Iowa (not at the same time!), Curmie looks forward to the caucuses and primaries with anxiety, but perhaps a little hope. We couldn’t get a lot worse, and there might just be someone we hadn’t thought of who’ll emerge from one party or the other. Just… uh… don’t bet the mortgage on it. And be prepared to vote for the less awful candidate.
No comments:
Post a Comment