2016 elections - because it's never too early

[Berkut]

I don't agree that the Dems need fresh blood. Fuck that. Obama was fresh blood, and he couldn't politic his way out of a we papaer bag full of dead fetuses.

I want some incredibly old POLITICIAN who knows where the bodies are buried, knows how to work the legislateive process, and knows how to make obstructionists pay for being obstructionists.

I don't think that is Clinton. She has the old part down, but I don't get the feel that she is a particuarlly savvy player in the game of "How to get shit done in Washington". She is just her husbands wife, and has mostly gotten where she is on the basis of her name.

We need:

Zombie Lyndon Johnson

[derspiess]

Zombie Lyndon Johnson

The man could get things done, and sure as shit knew how to order himself some pants:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nR_myjOr0OU

[Phillip V]

She is just her husbands wife, and has mostly gotten where she is on the basis of her name.

Hillary would have done plenty fine had she not married Bill. He told people before they married that she could easily be the Senator of any state she moved to; maybe even become President.

Having the option to marry any woman he wanted, Bill chose Hillary for her intellectual/political talents. But he had the opportunity in Arkansas first, so she left behind her nascent career in Washington to follow him.

[derspiess]

We'd not have known much of anything about Hillary had Bill not married her.  She wouldn't have become Senator, let alone Secretary of State, had she not married Bill.

[CountDeMoney]

Damn those traditional gender roles breakers.

[Sheilbh]

Yep. Except for being a wife, she's done less politically than Cristina Kirchner.

Also I liked 2008 in part because it was the first time in a very long time that Dole, Bush and Clinton didn't appear on any ballot papers. Bush-Clinton would be a sad step back.

Personally I think it's time for Biden.

[Sheilbh]

Damn those traditional gender roles breakers.

In fairness Clinton chose to follow them as a route to power. Thatcher didn't. Cherie Blair didn't. As I say even Cristina Kirchner didn't. I don't think you can damn traditional gender roles when your political career is based on having been First Lady.

[Eddie Teach]

Hillary would have done plenty fine had she not married Bill.

Sure. She'd be senior partner in a rich law firm.

[CountDeMoney]

Personally I think it's time for Biden.

You also think it's time for Huckabee, so that tells us how much you fucking know.

[derspiess]

Personally I think it's time for Biden.

[Sheilbh]

Personally I think it's time for Biden.

Well I always think it's time for Biden

He was the only other candidate who appealed in 2008 or since. It is a shame that he's not considered though. He is the latest in a line of very consequential VPs. From what I've read he's often the guy who finally brokers the deals with Congress and is involved in all of the negotiations. He's also been a relatively important voice in foreign policy decisions. You want someone old who has experience with this stuff, then Biden's the guy. Sadly his sense of joy in politics means he isn't taken seriously enough

But I agree with Berk. Politicians are too young now. I don't think a PM or President should be retiring in their 50s - not least because they have lots of free time and normally still have the desire to 'do something' I think there's a lot to this:

Is it time to go grey again?


Harold Macmillan famously cared little for the Arctic Monkeys.

In an interview with John Humphries on the Today programme yesterday, the Prime Minister found it necessary to defend himself from the suggestion that he was spending too much time with his family.

It prompted Max Atkinson to ask an excellent question: are parents of young children fit to run the country?

It's a simple fact that being the parent of young children - if it's done right - requires a great deal of time and effort. The sleep deprivation alone is famously punishing. Then there's, well, everything else. It seems common sense to conclude that the people having to deal with such demanding and stroppy bosses at home can't be doing their day jobs as well as they would otherwise.

In most cases, this temporary productivity decline is, from the point of view of society, a small price to pay. We accept that people who may be less effective in their jobs for a few years should nonetheless keep them, because we want a society as full of stable, happy families as possible. And those people may go on to be even better at their jobs when they come out the other side.

But Prime Ministers are a special case. They are only in the job for a few years (around ten at most). It's not just any job either - it's the job upon which, to some extent, all of our futures depend. It is also an unusually intense and demanding role (again - if it's done right). Would it not be sensible to appoint people to this position who had every chance of working at full capacity?

As Max suggests, this is one part of a larger issue, which is whether we made a sensible turn when we decided that we didn't want fuddy-duddy old grey hairs like Harold Macmillan in the top job, but young, dynamic and thrusting types - people who listened to the Arctic Monkeys (in Gordon Brown's day) and brought young families into Downing Street. Family aside, it's pretty clear that Cameron, like Blair before him in his first term, is suffering from his relative inexperience.

Maybe it's time to go grey again. As the UK population ages, it will be interesting to see if the age of our leaders moves in tandem. My vote is for Alistair Darling.

[Admiral Yi]

Hillary would have done plenty fine had she not married Bill. He told people before they married that she could easily be the Senator of any state she moved to; maybe even become President.

What do you expect him to say?  My wife is a reasonably intelligent, highly ambitious woman who saved my career by eating shit on 60 Minutes, and leveraged that into a Senate seat and a run at the White House?

And nobody without some serious star power just walks into a state and picks up a US Senate seat.

[CountDeMoney]

But I agree with Berk. Politicians are too young now. I don't think a PM or President should be retiring in their 50s - not least because they have lots of free time and normally still have the desire to 'do something'

Not only too young, but simply too inexperienced--not just as legislators, but they're even bypassing experience as executive branch members.

We've seen what happens on the Democratic side with going young straight out of the Hill with no executive experience (hell, even Dubya showed up every two years as Texas governor)...but when even the GOP is talking about still-wet-behind-the-ears legislators like Cruz, Rubio and Rand Paul as potential POTUS candidates simply for their extremist positions, while established and effective governors like Chris Christie is given a short primary life span and Jeb Bush is called a RINO, there's a real marketing problem at work.  And since he chose to run as Mittens, Destroyer of Lives instead of Massachusetts Mitt, that only seems to cement the GOP's preference for its potential pool of candidates for 2016.  Any decent GOP gubernatorial options?  Jindal?  Shitty loser state.  Scott Walker?  GOP wet dream, but dead in the water with moderates.

While I see nothing wrong with somebody like Biden or other effective, long-standing Senators with long histories of building legislative consensus running for President, those days are coming to a close.  The President of the United States is now the CEO of the Executive Branch, and gubernatorial talents are turning out to be a better fit.

[Caliga]

Personally I think it's time for Biden.

I would love a Biden presidency.  4 years of nonstop yuk-yuks.

[derspiess]

Personally I think it's time for Biden.

I would love a Biden presidency.  4 years of nonstop yuk-yuks.

It would be funny, yet sad to see Joe slide further into dementia.

STAND UP, CHUCK!!!