This more than likely will get me banned, I did something like this in 2000 where I picked Governor Grey Davis on California for 2004, and it got a few chuckles, so I'm doing it again for 2008. The 5 minutes it will probably be up before it gets washed away by other diary posts doesn't seem worth the effort, but atleast there will be a historical record up discrediting any future posts I may make and forcing me to take on a new persona.
The Democratic Party candidate will be revealed after a short respite of gentle weaping.
With a Presidential election only 4 years away, you hear many so-called experts prognosticating about who the candidates for either party will be. One common theme is that all talk about nonsensical, unimportant things like 'issues' or 'voting records'. The truth of the matter is, the political machines on both sides are so well oiled and talented that each of could probably make Hitler appear to be a man of peace and domestic tranquility, and make Caligula out to be a moral crusader. Unfortunately, they couldn't do anything for Alan Keyes. Its safe to assume that any character that rises to some level of national politics either does not have any skeletons in their closet, or any that are still in the closet that sneak out during the campaign can be dealt with with a healthy dose of denial, dodging, and smearing of the opponent. If Clinton could survive his sex scandals and Bush could survive, well, being a moron, anybody can pretty much survive anything, if there's enough money behind them. Except for John Kerry being a Vietnam Vet, apparently that was simply inexcusable.
So what does that leave us with? Well, each side basically has a committed base of about 20% to 25%. As much as we all like to whine and complain, I'm sure come November 2008, we'll all have Hillary/Daschle yard signs in front of our houses, no matter how violently we oppose it now, and the Free Republic people will have Falwell/Santorum bumper stickers on their cars, no matter how much they may be in denial now. Next, it's safe to say that after the massive vetting process and media campaigns and after the workings of the massive party machinery of both sides, they will each come up with a platform watered down enough to appeal to another 20% of the electorate. So what we are left with is an electorate polarized at about 40% to 45% to either side, with a soft, squishy middle of about 10% to 20%.
So with all the silly things like 'issues' and 'positions' worked out regardless of who the candidate is, the only thing left to pick candidates on are things which appeal to this cream filling of America. So who is this middle? Well... now that we don't have to pander to them, the truth can be told. These people are largely uninformed and easily swayable. The most important factors for the candidates are nonvisual cues and less of what they say and more of how they say it. So with this in mind, this is my handicapping of the 2008 Presidential Election.
First off, keep in mind I'm talking about 'winnable' candidates. I believe parties don't always field candidates to win, but they have other reasons. Barry Goldwater in '64 to reposition the party, Walter Mondale in '84 for who the fuck knows why, Bob Dole in '96 just to get his mean-spirited, scorched earth campaign style out of the way for their Golden Boy in 2000. So the parties can pretty much nominate whomever they want, but if they want to win, more than likely they'll follow the rules laid out here. Also, I'm talking rules for modern day candidates, let's say post WWII, the advent of mass media.
The funny thing about these rules as you will see, is how much the results start looking like conventional wisdom using more 'enlightened' forms of prognistication, which may be a case of the cart leading the horse.
Visual Cues:
- While I don't want to rule out female candidates all together, with the contentious nature that I'm sure the 2008 election will have, I'm sure neither side will want to risk it, so the candidate is going to be male.
- White. Sort of because of #1, but more so because any possible candidates who aren't white violate rules below in various ways.
- Tall. With all other things being equal, you can count on the tallest man winning. The most recent election being an exception, but this is a good betting rule.
- No glasses. Not only do girls not make passes at people with glasses, people don't vote for them, atleast not for President. Now I know you may think George the First violates this, he did wear glasses, but I could not find one picture of him campaigning with them on, even as Vice President. So to the uninformed voter, he didn't wear them.
- No baldies. Once again, all things being equal, an ice cube has a better chance in hell than a bald man running for President. The first thought that comes to mind is Dwight D. Eisenhower but remember, he was running against Adlai Stevenson, both times. And you have to give him some credit for winning WWII.
- No fatties.
- No facial hair. This site here explains this one much better than I can. Also, I'd like to add, the major contribution of gay culture on America is to make us unconsciously question the sexuality of any mustachioed man. Bad for the current climate.
- And in combination with #5, a glorious head of hair. CW says that Kerry had the best hair this time around, but apparently, Bush won the only poll conducted on the subject.
- A very boring, non-ethnic name. The name can not in any way have any flare or pizzazz. It can not in any way be twisted or mispronounced to say anything negative. A guy could have a plan to abolish taxes, give free education and healthcare, bring world peace, but if his name is Rudolfo Brzckninski or Richard Gozinya, he ain't getting elected.
- Good looking. Presidential elections are almost referendums on who is better looking. This is not a gay/straight issue either. Mel Gibson could be promising forced labor camps and the abolishment of private property, he'd still beat Danny DeVito.
I know the first person who comes to mind is Richard Nixon. He violates almost every rule here in some way. But people have gone mad trying to explain the phenomena that was Tricky Dick. The only thing I can venture is he ran against
Hubert Humphrey, and man with two bad, nerdy first names, and
George McGovern who, despite his rugged good looks, couldn't overcome the giggles his last name would get.
So, with applying these rules, who are we whittled down to? Well, one more thing that will wipe out many of the names you think are still left. Any winning candidate must be a governor or vice president. I know Senator Kennedy beat VP Nixon, but this was before the DNC began dropping acid and thought men named Humphrey and McGovern could become President, so all the other rules trump this one. Being a senator requires you to be pleading, cajoling, and long winded, because you are in a body of equals, and you need to persuade instead of lead. Senators, by their very nature, are betas, and the uninbformed American picks an alpha for President. It got me mad in the current election when Kerry would say things like 'what this President needs to do...' and 'I call upon this President to..'. Hey Sparky, you're going to be President, who cares what Bush does. With statements like this, Kerry slipped into the beta male role to Bush's alpha male in the subconscious of the uninformed voter. Therefore, no wimpy Senators.
So for the fun of it, lets look at the Republican governor's first.
It seems the Republicans already beat me to this, by providing a glorious site like this
Perusing this layout like a collection of chicken bones attempting to divine the course of human events, one striking image emerges. An adonis of a man, a beautiful specimen of human perfection whose handsome good looks could rule this nation as a demi-god. This famous movie actor seems destined to greatness. Of course I'm talking about Craig Nelson, the dad from Poltergiest, and Governor of Idaho. Unfortunately, the name of the new character he is playing is Dirk Kempthorne. Come on, first off, what kind of name is 'Dirk'? Second of all, Kempthorne is too confusing, and too long. Sounds like two people. I could see Kempthorne/Frist confusing the hell out of undecided voters in the voting booth - wait a second, am I voting for Kemp? Or Thorne? Oh no, I just accidentally voted for Pat Buchanan!. But seriously, what about the big movie star Governor, Ed Asner, governor of Georgia. Although movie star good looks would do him well with the ladies, the well known animal fornication and drug abuse that characterizes the current Governor of Georgia, he's out of the running. So who we have left -Schwarzennegger, too ethnic, Colorado's Bill Owens, looks like a lesbian. Jeb Bush, too fat. Pataki, although a popular blue state governor, c'mon... Pataki, that hairline isn't going pass muster for anything greater than vice-president in 2008, and I just can't help but think there is a name of some bizarre sex act that rhymes or sounds like Pataki. (Dems, get to work on this one).
I must let real world politics interfere here and mention one name at the top of everyone's lists - Senator and Majority Leader Bill Frist. To see the unlikelihood of a Frist candidacy, we must push the timeline forward 4 years. I can foresee in 2008, we'll be dealing with a crushing economic depression, armed fundamentalist Christian guerillas choking off major urban areas across the country, US forces facing off against joint EU/Russian/Chinese forces in Kazakhstan, and most importantly, the outrage at gay men sharing rides to use the carpool lane, forcing Congress to debate the virtue of a Sanctity of Carpool Lanes Amendment. During these dark times, America will need a strong leader , or should I say, a tall leader. Unbeknownst to many, Bill Frist is short, almost hobbit-like in stature. America will demand a much taller leader.
So that leaves us with a short list:
Mitt Romney of Massachusetts
Robert L. Ehrlich of Maryland
and the dark horse candidate of 2008,
Rick Perry, former lead singer of 80s stadium rock band Journey
Now mind you, in 2000 I prophetized Gray Davis being the Democratic Presidential Candidate in 2004, but I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the 2008 Republican candidate for President will be....
Mitt Romney, Governor of Massachusetts.
The logic of the Uniformed Voter Guide here actually spits out Rick Perry. All three being of equal looks, Rick Perry wins on ease of name to pronunciate and remember. Being a famous 80s rock musician doesn't hurt either. He could make it all the way until November until people begin to realize the lead singer of Journey was Steve Perry, not Rick Perry. At first, after you roll the name Mitt Romney over your tongue a few times, it is hard to get over its dubious ethnicity, and it sounds almost made up. But, if you look closely at various pictures of Mitt Romney and if you catch footage of him on the television, you can see his secret weapon to clinch the Republican nomination literally sprouting out of the sides of his head. Yes, we are talking about the greying pattern of his hair. Right now you just see whisps of grey at the tops of his sideburns and a little bit at the part, but if you extrapolate this out 4 years, he's going to be a spitting image of George Hamilton. George Hamilton is in a much better class of movie stars than either Craig Nelson or Ed Asner - he exudes confidence, class, and an air of superiority which is more seductive than off-putting. Women want to sleep with him, and men want to be him. Little old uninformed ladies will be falling all over themselves for a chance to vote for George Hamilton. So barring George Hamilton actually running in 2008, I'm going to put my money on Mitt Romney being the Republican candidate for president in 2008.