Whatever else the New Year brings, at least it won’t be a presidential election or any of the primaries, caucuses, or conventions leading up to it. Which is more than OK with me. American presidential campaigns have grown excruciatingly overlong, and I look forward to a respite from the obsessive political coverage, the ginned-up gaffes and controversies, the rush to dissect each twitch in public opinion, the avalanche of dishonest advertising and disingenuous “fact-checking.”
Of course not everyone agrees, especially in the press corps. “We all have our peculiar tastes,” George F. Will once wrote. “Some people like Popsicles. Others like gothic novels. I like politicians.” Peculiar is right. I won’t say I’ve never met a politician I liked — two or three I’ve even admired — but on the whole I tend to agree with Tom Dobbs, the character played by Robin Williams in the 2006 movie “Man of the Year.” A TV entertainer who runs for president on a lark, Dobbs tells his audience: “Politicians are a lot like diapers; they should be changed frequently, and for the same reason.”
Comments
This comment has been removed.
This comment has been removed.
Mr. Jacoby decries the very aspects of politics of which he was a daily participant. Column after column spouted the latest wayward thinking of the Heritage Foundation. As for Ann Romney, things were not going her way and she tried to use magical thinking to bring it to a halt. With more money than God and after smearing every rival throughout the campaign with a huge warchest she suddenly cries "unfair." It is not that Mr. Jacoby is tired of the presidential politics but rather that his side lost. So Kitch she can include him among those in your disdain of those dishonest unsavory political figures.
This comment has been removed.
OTB, Jacoby has written a temperate and reasonable commentary on our electoral process. Why are you compelled to attack him? Can't you tolerate speech by political conservatives?
There is something to be said for the Parliamentary form of government, which generally brings disparate parties into coalitions that run their governments with little opposition. At some point, however, when the coalition's inner differences override their commonalities, no-confidence votes lead to a call for new elections, with those elections to follow in short order, no more than three to six months away. The beauty of this system is that, when government is operating, it actually passes legislation. And, when the strains become too much to maintain the coalition, a new government is elected. Because nobody knows when this call for elections will take place, all lawmakers are subject to "recall" at almost any time, and campaigning is restricted to a fixed (and relatively short) period. The current situation in the United States encourage lthe losing side to start running for office the day after they were defeated (see Mitch McConnell speaking of Barack Obama in January 2009). Of course, it does not help to have hordes of news agencies, looking for any stories that they can sell, hounding politicians, playing "gotcha", and mining for "gaffes" for four years until the next Presidential election. Alas, the current atmosphere in this country encourages campaiging and not governance.
This comment has been removed.
It is also worth considering the scale of things. We have approximately one hundred million voters in this country. While our government was organized when there were far, far fewer in the populace, the structure we have does seem better suited to a large nation. Organising elections after no-confidence votes, or installing mechanisms such as coalitions or run-off elections so as to guarantee that the 'gang in charge' has the support of a majority of voters, might prove too impractical.
I have known a lot of politicians in my life and I have to admit I do not hold most of them in disadain. Most certainly have that certain lust for acknowledgement and power that a large portion of those in both public and private life that get far ahead tend to have within themselves. Yet most of those in public life are far more personable and thoughtful than those I have met in the private sector. There is plenty within the political sphere to dislike, but I question who Jeff blames for this.
We have a 24/7 media that lusts for any negative story out there but never addresses the good things many of these pols do for their districts or their state or the individuals their staffs assist with public policy. We have a public that is mesmerized by "celebrity" status and scandal rag news reporting on both the left and the right. We have a media on both sides that seems to have no desire to take a position on facts or civilizing the debate.
To often the public confuses ideology with personal integrity. Many a left leaning pol believes he is helping the less fortunate and many the "corporatist" pol truly believes it is the way to go. The saddest pols I see are those who run for govt. on the grounds of hating govt. and refusing to govern, for me these are the most unworthy pols I can imagine. Theirs is not a constructive passion but a destructive passion that is unhealthy for the nation on so many levels.
This comment has been removed.
Well Kitch politicians by the very nature of their chosen profession tend to be far more personable than the numbers oriented businessman. Perhaps one could call it the attribute of your "car salesman". Not a well loved profession, but personable individuals. Over the years I have found pols to be no more than a reflection of their constituency. So if the pol is repellant then generally the constituency does not reflect the most open or generous of human qualities. A huge generalization I know but pols are by nature generalists. But I agree both worlds are full of buffoons. But then I am an elitist by nature and admit it. That which many on the left and right refuse to admit to themselves.
This column is the same type as the 'you better vote', 'wait ten minutes and the weather will change' and the drawer filled with same old/same old columns that hack writers routinely have published.
If politicians are like diapers, Jacoby is what they are intended for ... this guy is a bore, a horrible writer and a rip-off of others. I know the Globe believes it needs an in house conservative. So get one who can write. There are plenty.
If Jacoby writes a partisan column, you attack him. If he doesn't write a partisan column, you still attack him. Why don't you take a break and just enjoy the morning sun?
This comment has been removed.
The gist here seems to be " My guy Romney would not have done so bad if he had only said less." There's some truth to that, but a better man said "If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen."
This comment has been removed.
We could have cut down on much of this nonsense by adopting a strong and well funded public financing system for all political campaigns. Most of the American public rejected this approach a few decades back, but the result has been almost complete domination of political campaigns by wealthy and powerful interests. Campaigns are long, in large part, because of the groundwork needed by most candidates to raise sufficient funds for ever more expensive campaigns.
Conservatives have done this nation no good by ruling that corporations are people with all the rights of citizenship, and that free speech mandates that there be no limit on how much any interest can spend to support a particular candidate or issue. We are depriving the powerless and less powerful full access to the political process and the results can only be destabalizing.
This comment has been removed.
I've listened to right wing talk radio (Limbaugh, Carr, Savage, Coulter etc. enough to know that Blacks, Latinos, Gays, women, public employees, the unemployed, the poor, educators etc. have been constantly in their gunsights for ridicule and abuse. And few if any Republicans in positions of authority have ever called them out on what they say. You can take issue with what Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Stephanie Miller, Ed Schultz and Bill Press say on their broadcasts, but they don't get down and dirty the way many right wing broadcasters do. And they also have to compete with NPR and the other mainstream liberal media, so their impact is far lesss. I remember Schultz going over the line against Ann Coulter and immediately apologizing for what was a truly irresponsible and crude statement. I never remember Limbaugh apologizing after referring to one woman with some vulgar terminology (the Globe won't let me say the word) and Howie Carr and Jay Severin have always gone down in the gutter to attack what I guess we can now refer to as one or more parts of the Obama Coalition.
By the way, I don't put Jeff Jacoby in this category. He is forceful, but always treats his opponents with respect. We've gone back and forth with pointed but friendly, humorous and respectful emails. Can't ask for more than that.
Sure, there are charlatons, bald face liars and snake oil salesmen on our side of the aisle, but I think the Koch Brothers, National Chamber of Commerce and the NRA are fair game.
I agree with the gist of Jacoby's column. I would not mind holding off on the 2016 presidential campaign for a bit -- at least until after the 2014 midterms. ;-)
I thought in their quest to be first New Hampshire was holding the 2016 primary next month.
This is great. Humor to end the year.
Presidential campaigns are becoming like a decades-long marriage to the same old nag.
You are so right galwaycity. Former Sen. Fritz Hollings has lamented that he had to raise $30,000 a week, it bears repeating, $30,000 a week, to remain competitive for re-election. You don't get that kind of dough from small contributors. You get that kind of dough from people who can call 100 or so of their "friends" and tell them to max out to the candidate of choice, and do so by the end of the week. That in turn buys access and deference, if not outright votes. Mark J. Green, the same man who ran against Bloomberg for NYC mayor, wrote a book around '73 called Who Runs Congress, which detailed back then the corrupting influence special interest money was having on our political system. It has gotten much worse since, with the capstone being the Citizens United decision. The public has been sold a bill of goods against public financing. We need to take another look at it because as anyone who has ever owned a dog knows, he who feeds the dog owns the dog. Right now, we are not feeding the dog so it obeys a different master.
Calvin Coolidge? Seriously? Jeff Jacoby is actually touting the Coolidge presidency whose policies led directly to the Great Depression.
I agree with what I think is Jacoby's principal thrust: It's too bad that Presidential campaigns last so long.
Other than that, I'm pretty sure I wasted my time reading it. A quote from a so-so comedic movie. Other quotes from Ann Romney, George Will and Teddy Roosevelt -- Republicans all. Mention of a prospective Republican Presidential candidate. There's also no acknowledgement of how much things have changed over more than two centuries. Calvin Coolidge never saw a TV camera, much less a computer. For most of our history there were no sound bites; there were only newspaper articles. Radio wasn't a factor until the 1930's.
I'm not sure what the purpose of this column was. Maybe a bit of (mostly Republican) nostalgia? Where are any suggestions for possible improvement?
Maybe deciding that corporations aren't people would help, but in a free society somebody ought to be able to start campaigning whenever they want, even eight years ahead of the election if the want.