Saw this:
This is from NPR, who did the little chart to show where everyone is standing in the polls, and how Fox decided to cut everyone off. While this isn't a big surprise, at least for those who are following the fun of the election, it's still a bit revealing... Here are some of my thoughts:
1. This field is all a bit of a joke. First off, there are 17 candidates. 17. I just... wow. I don't even know what to say. Maybe everyone feels like this is a Republican election, so if they can rise to the top of the pile in this, they'll have a good chance... However...
2. The one who is currently on the top of the pile is Donald Trump. Donald Trump. DONALD. TRUMP. I don't know whether to laugh or cry. He's treating the whole thing with such utter disdain and disregard that it's making the rest of the field look like fools. He's leading the polls by double digits, which means that if the Convention were held today, he'd be the likely candidate, and you'd have flowery speeches from the rest of the field throwing their support behind him, talking about how he's the guy who can get the country back on track, and beat the Democrats...
3. Here's the problem, and here's why THE TRUMP is the current trump - none of the rest of the field is distinguishable from anyone else. They're all the same.There are some that I think stand out for other things than saying "you're fired!"... Bush is the son/brother of presidents, so he's got name recognition (although the name association is questionably helpful)... Scott Walker stood up to the unions in Wisconsin, sort of (he's been gone a lot)... Huckabee has a TV program, I think, and has been a nominee before... Cruz is a senator from Texas, and is not just a little crazy (although a decent fellow... I shook his hand once)... Rand Paul is even more crazy... and Chris Christie will call out a traffic construction delay if he doesn't like your politics. There are others, but again - none of these people is super stellar or even slightly distinguishable. And maybe that's what the Republican Party is about, but it doesn't sell newspapers or win polls or elections.
4. Sadly, the Democratic Party isn't much better. Hillary Clinton is good, and will undoubtedly do an amazing job if she should win, but she's not really said anything that would distinguish her. Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is distinguishable, because he's very strident in his rhetoric... But that may also make him not electable.
5. If I were a Republican, which I am not, I'd be very, very upset with this field. The reason has to do both with the lack of distinguishable difference as well as the sheer number of people in the field. Because there are SO MANY people, whom do you pick to stand behind? And why? If I were going to donate money to a campaign, whom would I choose? At least THE TRUMP is rich, so he can fund his own carnival - ah, I mean, campaign. But the field being so broad and relatively similar, it would not make sense to put money behind any one candidate... So the campaign resources necessary to ultimately win an election are going to be spread out, if existent at all. All of this means a diluted field and funding issues going forward.
6. Looking at this field, I'm discouraged as a Democrat. I believe that the best candidate should win, regardless of which party one is from. And none of these people are really representative of me and my views. None of them speak to what's important to me and my family. And none of them is really a strong enough candidate to represent the United States as the Commander in Chief. Because, if the Republicans ARE successful a year from now, the President-elect will be the person who does all of those things. These people do not represent the best our Country has to offer. And it's discouraging. I can't imagine how I'd feel if I were a Republican.
It will be interesting, going forward, if anyone can become distinguishable from everyone else. Now would be a good time for a James K Polk to dark horse the election. Otherwise, I'm afraid we're looking forward to a year of yawns and gaffes and no real progress.
(click for a bigger version)
1. This field is all a bit of a joke. First off, there are 17 candidates. 17. I just... wow. I don't even know what to say. Maybe everyone feels like this is a Republican election, so if they can rise to the top of the pile in this, they'll have a good chance... However...
2. The one who is currently on the top of the pile is Donald Trump. Donald Trump. DONALD. TRUMP. I don't know whether to laugh or cry. He's treating the whole thing with such utter disdain and disregard that it's making the rest of the field look like fools. He's leading the polls by double digits, which means that if the Convention were held today, he'd be the likely candidate, and you'd have flowery speeches from the rest of the field throwing their support behind him, talking about how he's the guy who can get the country back on track, and beat the Democrats...
3. Here's the problem, and here's why THE TRUMP is the current trump - none of the rest of the field is distinguishable from anyone else. They're all the same.There are some that I think stand out for other things than saying "you're fired!"... Bush is the son/brother of presidents, so he's got name recognition (although the name association is questionably helpful)... Scott Walker stood up to the unions in Wisconsin, sort of (he's been gone a lot)... Huckabee has a TV program, I think, and has been a nominee before... Cruz is a senator from Texas, and is not just a little crazy (although a decent fellow... I shook his hand once)... Rand Paul is even more crazy... and Chris Christie will call out a traffic construction delay if he doesn't like your politics. There are others, but again - none of these people is super stellar or even slightly distinguishable. And maybe that's what the Republican Party is about, but it doesn't sell newspapers or win polls or elections.
4. Sadly, the Democratic Party isn't much better. Hillary Clinton is good, and will undoubtedly do an amazing job if she should win, but she's not really said anything that would distinguish her. Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is distinguishable, because he's very strident in his rhetoric... But that may also make him not electable.
5. If I were a Republican, which I am not, I'd be very, very upset with this field. The reason has to do both with the lack of distinguishable difference as well as the sheer number of people in the field. Because there are SO MANY people, whom do you pick to stand behind? And why? If I were going to donate money to a campaign, whom would I choose? At least THE TRUMP is rich, so he can fund his own carnival - ah, I mean, campaign. But the field being so broad and relatively similar, it would not make sense to put money behind any one candidate... So the campaign resources necessary to ultimately win an election are going to be spread out, if existent at all. All of this means a diluted field and funding issues going forward.
6. Looking at this field, I'm discouraged as a Democrat. I believe that the best candidate should win, regardless of which party one is from. And none of these people are really representative of me and my views. None of them speak to what's important to me and my family. And none of them is really a strong enough candidate to represent the United States as the Commander in Chief. Because, if the Republicans ARE successful a year from now, the President-elect will be the person who does all of those things. These people do not represent the best our Country has to offer. And it's discouraging. I can't imagine how I'd feel if I were a Republican.
It will be interesting, going forward, if anyone can become distinguishable from everyone else. Now would be a good time for a James K Polk to dark horse the election. Otherwise, I'm afraid we're looking forward to a year of yawns and gaffes and no real progress.
Comments