ChrisWeigant.com

Candidate Fatigue

[ Posted Thursday, July 2nd, 2015 – 16:43 UTC ]

This week, the 18th and 19th people running for president announced their candidacies. Chris Christie became the 14th Republican candidate running, while Jim Webb became the fifth Democrat to enter the race. These announcements won't even be the final ones of this election cycle, as everyone fully expects both Scott Walker and John Kasich to also throw their hats into the Republican ring. I have to admit, though, that the sheer number of candidates has worn me down. I have what could be called "candidate fatigue" at this point. It's tiring even keeping track of this big a pack, and even though the campaign has barely begun in earnest, I'm already exhausted.

Can anyone tell me one single fact about, say, George Pataki's campaign? He's trying to make a name for himself currently, by taking on Donald Trump. But even this bid for attention isn't getting much attention. Because no sane political wonk thinks Pataki has any chance whatsoever of securing his party's nomination.

I shouldn't single Pataki out, though. I should really be talking about the new entrants into the race. At the start of the campaign season, I set a lofty goal for my writing: I would give each and every candidate the dignity and respect of taking his or her candidacy seriously for at least one column, when they first announced. Today, I'm approaching the point of throwing in the towel on this promise to myself. Granted, Chris Christie is a governor of a major state and Jim Webb was not only a one-term senator but also Ronald Reagan's secretary of the Navy. Neither one is a "vanity candidate" (like, say, Carly Fiorina or Ben Carson), but that doesn't mean I think either one of them has a viable shot at the White House. Both men have political accomplishments, but neither one has much of a strong base even in their own states. And I don't think either one of them is going to add much to the political debate in any significant way.

Christie, like Bobby Jindal, probably should have run in 2012. That's when his popularity was most ascendant, and both men likely would have had at least a shot at dethroning Romney in the primaries. Now, not so much. Christie's brashness and straight talk has always been his trademark in the political world, but now there are plenty of brash Republicans running -- including a few who aren't afraid to say pretty much anything that pops into their heads. Christie now comes off as a slightly-more-reasonable version of Donald Trump. But Trump is actually running, so that doesn't really leave Christie a whole lot of room to differentiate himself from the pack. Oh, sure, there'll definitely be a few fun moments from the Christie campaign trail where (for instance) he tells someone to sit down and shut up, but that's really not all that compelling a reason to nominate him for the presidency, is it?

Jim Webb is in a similar situation, even in the much smaller Democratic field. There are only five Democrats running (this number likely won't grow unless Joe Biden jumps in), but only two of them have garnered any interest whatsoever from the voters. Lincoln Chafee and Martin O'Malley haven't yet made any sort of progress in the polls, and Jim Webb will likely find himself in a similar situation very soon. None of these three men's platforms are really all that different from Hillary Clinton's, after all. On this or that particular issue, they may stake out a position that is slightly more (or less) progressive than Clinton, but they're all singing from pretty much the same songbook. One really has to wonder if O'Malley, Chafee, and now Webb are secretly just running to be considered for Hillary's running mate.

The real race on the Democratic side will be between Clinton and Bernie Sanders. Sanders has set out a clear agenda, which so far Hillary hasn't really commented on one way or another (other than in the vaguest of terms). Sooner or later, she's going to have to pick which issues she's going to agree with Sanders on, and which she won't. That will be an interesting process for all Democrats to watch. But it will happen without much input from O'Malley, Webb, and Chafee, that's my guess.

Webb has convinced himself that he can win with the support of white working-class people, in essence. He's trying to win back the "Reagan Democrats," to put it another way. Democrats have struggled to win white working-class votes for the past few decades, and Webb's convinced he can reverse that trend. To this end, he just voiced support for the Confederate battle flag. Note that this isn't "supported it in a paper or quote from three decades ago," but instead recent support for the flag, post-Charleston. Webb, ex-senator from Virginia, obviously has his eye on certain Southern voters. Maybe Webb will surprise me, but I truly think this is a lost cause. I think that the Reagan Democrats have now become just run-of-the-mill Republicans, and that the South doesn't really decide national elections the way it used to. I could be wrong, but that's the way I see it.

Maybe I'm being too cynical, but it's all part of the exhaustion of having to examine 19 different candidacies (and counting). Yes, Chris Christie will sooner or later say something on the campaign trail that we'll all pay attention to (even if it's just to ridicule it). But he'll have to compete with the likes of Ben Carson, Donald Trump, Mike Huckabee, and Bobby Jindal in the "most outlandish thing a Republican candidate said this week" category -- some stiff competition indeed! Sure, there'll be lots of "throwing his weight around" fat jokes on late-night television, but making fun of a politician for how he or she looks is really the cheapest of cheap shots.

Chris Christie and Jim Webb are officially now running for president. Remember their names, because they will soon be answers in political trivia games. "I'll take 'Also Rans' for $600, Alex... Who was Chris Christie?" or "Who was Jim Webb?" might easily be heard on Jeopardy! at some future date. But neither one of them has much of a chance of rising any further than that in the incredibly crowded 2016 field.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

26 Comments on “Candidate Fatigue”

  1. [1] 
    dsws wrote:

    9.6k people is a real campaign rally. I'd seen stories gushing about Bernie Sanders filling some high-school gym to capacity, but the number from Madison is news-worthy for real.

  2. [2] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Do any of these candidates, of either party, have a vision for the future?

  3. [3] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I think the exhaustion Chris speaks of has more to do with the fact that none of these candidates is capable of inspiring anyone - or anything, for that matter - than with how many of them think they should run for president.

  4. [4] 
    dsws wrote:

    “I think that Bernie Sanders is going to play out a vision for America and that it is important for people to hear what he has to say.”

    --Elizabeth Warren

  5. [5] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Is she sure?

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    I think the exhaustion Chris speaks of has more to do with the fact that none of these candidates is capable of inspiring anyone - or anything, for that matter - than with how many of them think they should run for president.

    Well said...

    Until the faux-Dem candidates start holding Queen-In-Waiting Hillary's feet to the fire and start really questioning her on her qualifications and actions, it's clear that they aren't really serious about being POTUS...

    The GOP side is not AS bad...There is some real talent on the GOP side. Walker has done some amazing things for Wisconsin as evidenced by the fact that he overwhelmingly won 3 elections in his home state..

    The Dem side is fraught with old white people who are the past...

    The GOP side has some really young talent that are looking to the future...

    This is about as clear a choice for the American people as has been seen since the 2014 mid-terms..

    Michale

  7. [7] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Walker has done some amazing things

    Like defund Wisconsin universities to build a basketball stadium?

    http://thinkprogress.org/election/2015/06/04/3666122/scott-walkers-new-plan-cut-250-million-universities-spend-250-million-basketball-stadium/

    Brilliant!

    Please, please, let Scott Walker be the candidate. These things might actually make national news.

    -David

  8. [8] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Idunno, Liz. Bernie looks like he inspired some people in Madison.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsWf0TuM6AA

    He inspires me because he's the only person even close to talking about how corrupt our government has become.

    Don't get me wrong. I'll support Hillary over any Republican (unless perhaps Rand Paul somehow miraculously wins the nomination and then I might protest vote for him). It would be hard for her to do anything about the corruption, however, after taking hundreds of millions to billions of dollars in election funding.

    -David

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    Like defund Wisconsin universities to build a basketball stadium?

    No... Like getting the Unemployment down from 11.6 to 5.4 in just a few years..

    And doing it by ACTUALLY putting people to work, not the smoke and mirrors that the Obama Administration likes to put out...

    You can argue against Walker all you like.

    But the FACTS (3 election wins) show different..

    Michale

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    Walker would be much better for this country than Hillary Clinton..

    On that, there can be no argument..

    Michale

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    He inspires me because he's the only person even close to talking about how corrupt our government has become

    So....

    Yer inspired by Tea Party rhetoric..

    Who knew!!?? :D heh

    Michale

  12. [12] 
    TheStig wrote:

    CW-

    Taking a candidate serously includes pointing out factors that give him/her no serious chance of winning the nomination. Your vow remains intact. Vows aren't supposed to be easy.

    M-12

    The only important political similarity between Sanders and the
    Tea Party is Saul Alinsky, and the similarity is rhetorical, not political. You still don't get Bernie one little bit.

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    The only important political similarity between Sanders and the
    Tea Party is Saul Alinsky, and the similarity is rhetorical, not political. You still don't get Bernie one little bit.

    Oh, I get Bernie just fine.. They even made a movie about a weekend at his place.. :D

    Heh

    No, seriously. I do understand Bernie.. He's great at spending other people's money....

    Michale

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    But I agree that the BEST thing that can happen to this country is that Bernie is the Dem POTUS Candidate...

    :D

    Michale

  15. [15] 
    akadjian wrote:

    I think the best thing that could happen were if Bernie were the Dem POTUS ;)

    -David

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    But he'll have to compete with the likes of Ben Cardin, Donald Trump, Mike Huckabee, and Bobby Jindal in the "most outlandish thing a Republican candidate said this week" category -- some stiff competition indeed!

    I am sure you mean Ben Carson... :D

    Michale

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    I think the best thing that could happen were if Bernie were the Dem POTUS ;)

    Yea, but he will actually have to win an election to do that..

    Honestly, do you think the American People will vote him into office??

    Of course not.... That should be your first clue as to what's wrong... :D

    Michale

  18. [18] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale [16] -

    Dang, you're right... OK, fixed!

    Mea culpa. Just can't seem to ever remember his name right. I've misspelled it "Carsin" "Cardin" and all kinds of other ways. I'll get it right eventually... just more candidate fatigue, that's all...

    -CW

  19. [19] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    David,

    It would be hard for her to do anything about the corruption, however, after taking hundreds of millions to billions of dollars in election funding.

    I'm not sure I understand why it would be so hard for her, once she is safely elected, to do something real and substantial about that. Assuming that she really believes what she says and also assuming that she isn't going to run for her second term as soon as she gets elected to her first.

    In fact, if she really wants to make her mark and make the government less corrupt, then she should govern like she's only got four years to get it done. Wouldn't that be refreshing!?

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    In fact, if she really wants to make her mark and make the government less corrupt, then she should govern like she's only got four years to get it done. Wouldn't that be refreshing!?

    Refreshing??

    Absolutely..

    Possible for a person of Hillary Clinton's (lack of) character and integrity??

    Impossible....

    Ya'all need to keep in mind one thing..

    Everything you accuse Republicans of, every foul attitude and greedy activity....

    Can all be found in Hillary Clinton..

    "It's time to ask yourself what you believe...."
    -Walter Donovan, INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE

    What's more important?

    Character and integrity??

    Or winning..

    Michale

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    In fact, if she really wants to make her mark and make the government less corrupt, then she should govern like she's only got four years to get it done. Wouldn't that be refreshing!?

    Refreshing??

    Absolutely..

    Possible for a person of Hillary Clinton's (lack of) character and integrity??

    Impossible....

    Ya'all need to keep in mind one thing..

    Everything you accuse Republicans of, every foul attitude and greedy activity....

    Can all be found in Hillary Clinton..

    "It's time to ask yourself what you believe...."
    -Walter Donovan, INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE

    What's more important?

    Character and integrity??

    Or winning..

    Michale

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michale [16] -

    Dang, you're right...

    Oooooooo I just LOOOVE hearing that!! heh :D

    Michale

  23. [23] 
    akadjian wrote:

    I'm not sure I understand why it would be so hard for her, once she is safely elected, to do something real and substantial about that.

    The money typically comes with strings attached. Even though there is no quid pro quo (the golden rule in Washington is to never say what you want in writing or any kind of public setting), there are expectations.

    Look at all of the things here husband supported in exchange for the money. NAFTA, repealing Glass-Steagall, the Telecommunications Act of 1996, cuts to welfare, etc, etc. Nothing in Hill's background makes me think she would do any differently. She is the establishment democratic candidate.

    I will support her as the better alternative (to most GOP candidates) if she wins in the primary.

    -David

  24. [24] 
    akadjian wrote:

    My heart and values though are with Bernie!

  25. [25] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    David,

    The money typically comes with strings attached.

    Well, that goes without saying, doesn't it. Of course, that doesn't mean that Hillary, if she is such a great candidate, has to play those kinds of politics.

    Do I believe she's a great candidate? No, I do not.

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    The problem with Hillary is that she is her own worst enemy..

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/07/07/hillary-clinton-why-her-worst-enemy-is-not-republican.html

    Juan Williams says it best. As he sometimes does.. :D

    Michale

Comments for this article are closed.