Too Much Bush

GOTCHA! If the title lured you to read this in the hopes of something saucy I apologize. I couldn't resist trying to sex it up because we are snowed in here in Pennsylvania and I'm bored. I'll try to add something salacious to the always hot topic of the Invisible Primary.... but even I may not be that talented.

The "Bush," I reference, of course, would be Jeb. Son of 41, brother of 43, and if the chattering class has anything to say about it, number 45 himself. A nice article from Larry Sabato gives some of the most recent 2016 rankings on the GOP side and puts Jeb as a "wild card" which to me takes a verrrry broad use of the word "wild." A Bush running for president you say? How novel. And using a man named "Jeb" in the same sentence as "wild" just conjures up images of some rollicking country club party where someone nicknamed "Trip" had one too many G & Ts and drove a golf cart into the sandtrap (clutch the pearls!). And it's not so wild to think that he's running since the guy has checked all of the IP marks (wrote a book, gave some big platform speeches) and he's got the name recognition to raise some serious cash. I was actually going to insert some prurient language here about Bush's thick hair and the heat in Florida but I will restrain myself because this is clearly a high-brow blog. Don't say I didn't try.

Anyway, it's the Christie/ GWB kerfuffle that is causing all of the Bush speculation (Go ahead - insert "speculating for Bush" joke here please), because serious people (that's YOU Sus Paley!) have wondered whether Christie can come back from le scandal. I doubt it: His narrative frame has changed and that's never good. People see him as a petty tyrant (as opposed to a tyrant with a purpose which is fine, really). And the world's best comedians have had a field day mocking the crap out of him (the best of which is right HERE. And you are welcome). To quote the scholar Ke$ha: "He's going down. I'm yelling timber."

Which leaves a big hole for the GOP to fill and very few people on the Republican bench who can fill it. Bush is wise to keep quiet, because look at what happened to Christie when his star started to burn really brightly? The inevitable backlash against a winner bit him in the tuchas. This is what most concerns those on Team Clinton: Don't use the "I" word (Which is "inevitable." And certainly don't use "I" in the word "Team" because we all know there is no "I" in "Team." Sheesh) because that inevitability thing helped to tank the HRC campaign in 2008. You become an assumption and two things happens: a) The media takes you for granted; and b) The backlash begins.

So there is reason for Jeb to lay low as long as possible, plus there is the truism that three Bushes may be one too many (some would argue three too many, but I'll leave that to the partisans). The possibility of another Bush-Clinton match is at one time alluring because we can pretend it is 1992 again (and that was a super fun year - am I right?). And yet, maybe former First Lady Barbara Bush was right when she said that the nation has "had enough Bushes." Let me add to that, mayhaps, the possibility that we've had enough Clintons and Pauls too. Just a thought.

And speaking of people named Paul. there is more to say about Rand Paul and his completely absurd conversation about Hillary, Bill Clinton, and Monica Lewisnky but I will let Andy Borowitz take that from here.

I would like to start a snow day contest for the best Bush-IP-sex joke. We're stuck inside - might as well make it interesting. Winner gets a "Ship Happens" tee shirt or I buy them a drink at the Midwest Political Science Association meeting in April. Ready? Set? GO!

Fall = Best Season Ever

And we're back! Late September formally brings us academic classes in full swing and autumnal glory where all college campuses look like they do in the brochures. Crunchy leaves, sweater-wearing students, cheerful football games and underage drinking. Ah, September. On a personal note, my students this semester are fabulous! They totally make up for the feces-fest unraveling now on Capitol Hill, because watching that is enough to discourage even a stalwart, system-adoring political scientist. Here's to a new generation!

But first, let's look at the current state of affairs.

This September brings us another perennial nugget of joy: the threat of a government shutdown. Unless you have been completely distracted by the WORLD'S BEST COMMERCIAL (as, I confess, I have been at times where distraction is necessary), you know about the looming crisis and the resulting rift in the Republican Party. If not, please let this terrific article explain for you the coming week (courtesy of my friend and fellow blogger, Lonce). And sorry for stealing this, Lonce. You an also check out this good one from Politico (like they do anything badly?).

Since this entire kerfuffle is political theater, you just know there has to be Invisible Primary drama behind the scenes and so we begin with the thespianism on the floor of the US Senate right this minute! Quick! To C-SPAN 2 (the Deuce)! Texas Senator Ted Cruz (R) launched an old-fashioned filibuster (ala Mr. Smith) against Obamacare and vouched to speak "until I am no longer able to stand." Good on you, sir, and this comes after a bruising little amount of press that called you a bunch of names and also questioned your popularity. It's good to stand for something, especially when you actually have to stand in order to stand for it.

But the possible shutdown tactic is splitting the GOP which is never good, unless you are a Democrat. Specifically, the 2016 IP contenders have to weigh in on this and thus far the results are mixed. Republican Governors Chris Christie (NJ) and Scott Walker (WI) both begrudgingly said that they would not want to shut the government down, as did former Florida Governor Jeb Bush. On the other side are the aforementioned Cruz and Sen. Mike Lee, and sorta kinda Florida Sen. Marco Rubio who seems to want it both ways by saying that "The American people support defunding Obamacare and oppose shutting down the government." OK! Not sure how that works out, but here is PolitiFact's take on Rubio's press statement.

So how is it going to end? Good Lord, who knows? I do know that Veep Biden schlepped out to flood-devastated Colorado and promised that regardless of any shutdown, FEMA would provide assistance to those in need which was both reassuring and tactically savvy, all at the same time. Last week, Biden was in Iowa at the Tom Harkin steak fry, which fueled speculation that he was, in fact, running. At the fry, he swapped hats with an Iowan for a photo-op, which only fueled my motherly instinct to yell "DON'T DO THAT!" as a preventative measure against head lice. Joe, don't say I didn't warn you. And don't share your comb or barrettes either.

Wrapping up this week in the Invisible Primary, last night former President Bill Clinton was on David Letterman, who was fishing for Hillary 2016 scoop. Letterman said: “If she is running to your knowledge, blink twice.” Bill denied all knowledge of his wife's intentions, which did not seem to surprise me in the least. Fair turnabout, don't you think?

That's all from the cheap seats. if the government shuts down, I tell my students, the price of pizza is going to sky rocket and beer will be banned in all 50 states. They don't believe me. See? What a smart, terrific group I've got! Hooray for September. And Happy Fall everyone!

Middle of Orientation Post

Not much of a post today, but I've got a little time to kill as I'm in the middle of a talk on time management as part of my orientation for my new gig at South Dakota State.

Whilst effectively multi-tasking between the rah rah lectures and blog reading, I came across this post on skipping Iowa by Jonathan Bernstein.

To reiterate one point: no, it's not too early to talk about this. Laying down the groundwork for Iowa an the other early contests is the essence of the invisible primary. We're fast approaching the time that  events like Tom Harkin's steak fry start to attract possible Democratic hopefuls, say Joe Biden who dropped in this year, and candidates of all stripes will begin trolling the state fair for more important reasons than checking out the butter cow.

One other bit I'd add one the long list of candidates that skipped Iowa, only to flame out in spectacular fashion later is Rudy Giuliani. By skipping these early contests, Giuliani and these other candidates he mentioned showed a fundamental misunderstanding of the process necessary to win the nomination. While that might have been excusible in the 70s when parties and candidates were figuring out the new system, today it's just plain stupid. As we know the triangulation on a candidate by party activists is key to winning the nomination. Pulling out of these early races either shows a candidate doesn't understand this, or that he or she is so desperate at that point because of their systematic failures in the pre-primary phase.

So to rope this back to Christie, if he's serious and smart, he'll no doubt be popping up here in the near future.

Slow News Days = IP Expansion

Have you ever noticed that on the days where there is no real news, the crap stuff seeps in more readily? This is not to say that on a good news day there is quality stuff out there, but when the NSA is poking into our business, at least the big three plus the cable news nets pay a modicum of attention to issues that… I don’t know… matter.  

And speaking of the NSA, just a quick story: When my husband deployed to Afghanistan in 2001 I was left behind on Fort Drum, the Army’s 10^th Mountain Division (Climb to Glory!). Since this was the very first “real world” deployment in a long time, even experienced Army wives didn’t know what to do and I was far from qualified to understand anything. I pretty much just stood there and looked confused. Of the precious few pieces of advice I was given: The mail will be slow, “JAG” was not just a bad TV show and you needed them to fill out paperwork, and your phone calls would be monitored. Thus, when we were talking 14 times a day, my sister and I got into the habit of saying “hi” to those we referred to as the ‘men on the phone.’ Sometimes we gave them recipes because we’re friendly like that. So this NSA stuff? Sort of old hat. Hello again, my men-on-the-phone friends! Hope you liked that Yankee Pot Roast recipe we spoke about a decade ago. Somebody remind me to add a salutation now in my outgoing e-mails to the nice people at Verizon and at Fort Meade. Moni and I have a killer salmon recipe for you! Perhaps a poor choice of words….

Now back to the Invisible Primary.

Last week seemed to be all about my gal Hillary, whose activities seemed to be continuously and unimaginatively described as: “Fueling speculation of a 2016 run.”  She rather coquettishly leapt ontoTwitter, describing herself as “wife, mom, lawyer, women & kids advocate, FLOAR, FLOTUS, US Senator, SecState, author, dog owner, hair icon, pantsuit aficionado, glass ceiling cracker, TBD…” and set the Twitter-sphere afire with loads of new followers jumping onto the bandwagon with alarming alacrity. She also spoke at the newly re-named “Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation” where she talked about early childhood education, always a decent issue upon which to campaign (the children is learning).  So she’s getting good press, but all readers of this blog know that the media spotlights are hot things and coverage is capricious. Thus, the news that HRC is slipping a bit in the polls was both newsworthy and unsurprising at the same time.  Ah, media attention: You fickle, fickle lady. The reason for the slip in the polls concerns, of course, the Benghazi affair which conservatives have locked onto like… conservatives onto the Whitewater Affair circa 1993. Huh. Anyhoo, a no less vaunted publication than Commentary has seized this moment to pile on and released this little nugget of joy about Hillary’s piss-poor performance at State, alleging not only did she cock up Benghazi, but under her watch the whole ambassadorial corps was riddled with sex scandals, a different type of cock up if you ask me (zing!). Suffice it to say, Hillary takes the media lead this week in our Invisible Primary, if only because of her seemingly road-block coverage of her Facebook-style “selfie” pictures. Oh, and by the way FLOAR stands for First Lady of Arkansas, so get your head out of the gutter.

Moving on to another relative of another past-POTUS (actually, two past POTUSES. POTI?), a warm welcome back to the IP to Jeb Bush, who spoke last week to the Faith and Freedom Coalition’s annual bacchanal (just kidding!) in Washington. Jeb, trying to get in front on this immigration issue, said the following: “Immigrants are more fertile, and they love families, and they have more intact families, and they bring a younger population. Immigrants create an engine of economic prosperity.” This truly bizarre statement brought out the funny from (never thought I’d say this) Sarah Palin, who remarked to the conference the next day: “I think it’s kind of dangerous territory . . . to want to debate this over one race’s fertility rate over another. And I say this as someone who’s kind of fertile herself.” Basically, Chris Cillizza in the WaPo had a nice piece here about the establishment vs. hard right kerfuffle in the GOP that is worth perusing if you haven’t already. This out-in-front strategy of Jeb’s is fodder for “will he or won’t he” 2016 speculation, but since his mom put the kibosh on it we can move along…

… to Chris Christie, who remains a media darling thanks to a crap-ton of press  he has garnered following the death of NJ Sen. Frank Lautenberg. Calling a special election for October brought mixed reviews, but the Governor barreled through to “slow jam” the news with Jimmy Fallon, share an acclamatory stage with Bill Clinton, and then watch as his Gallup poll numbers rise to make him the most popular IP 2016 contender of the moment. Christie is on top right now as he walks towards his own 2013 gubernatorial re-election bid. He’s stealing a play from Hillary herself from the time that she ran for her Senate re-election in 2006: Raise a truck-load of money, spend bupkis, and keep the campaign cash in your war chest. You know. Just in case another election just happens to come your way. Maybe in 2016?

Oh, who knows. Wait. I know someone who might: Hey, NSA! What do you think?

OK, OK. Go back to keeping us safe for democracy or whatever. Really: I love your work. Have you lost weight? Hope you enjoyed that Yankee Pot Roast.

Big hugs to the men on the phone,

Ali

Obesity and Political Viability

Much has been made about Chris Christie's recent lap band surgery in the context of the invisible primary; particularly by the class of folk who yell at each other on TV for a living, and even usually-reasonable columnists.  The obvious conclusion by the chattering classes: this was more politically than personally motivated.  The fact of the matter is that political science actually has something to say on this, and we say it based on something more than simple speculation.  Simply put, they don't know what the hell they're yelling and writing about.

This paper reporting experimental research by Miller, Lundgren, Filion, and Thompson has some interesting findings that suggests most overweight candidates don't have to worry too much about their body image management.  In fact, beanpoles like myself, may want to pack on a few extra pounds.  When shown digitally altered pictures of candidates and asked to make evaluations, respondents actually gave more positive feedback to most obese candidates than to non-obese ones.  "Most" is the important qualifier here.  Whilst obese males were systematically advantaged over their non-obese brothers (or in this case twin 'shopped' brothers), respondents had stronger negative emotional reactions to obese female candidates.  Body image is important, but it cuts in different directions for men and women.  Why am I not surprised?

Roping this all back to Gov. Christie, there's no earthly reason why he would undergo this invasive and risky procedure for simple political gain.  Even if he isn't aware of the political science out there, I can't imagine that someone of his personality, with all his political success and popularity would even begin to feel that his weight is an issue.  I for one, take him at his word.  The invisible primary explains a lot of political behavior, but not on this.

It’s a Treadmill! No, it’s a Mobius Loop! The Never-Ending Invisible Primary

It’s the least wonderful time of the academic year when the last assignments are handed in, grades are due, students are weepy, and every single honor society and campus group hosts an awards banquet. Most of us are pie-eyed with fatigue as we ping from exam to meeting to mandatory-fun social event, but the end is nigh and in a few short weeks we get to hit the re-set button and set off for summer. This is one of the selling points of an academic career for those of us optimistic about the future: There is an actual finish line and we get to cross it, once every 14 weeks. Some of us sprint across the tape, hands held high in a Nixonian victory pose and some of us stagger in, limping and wounded. But done is done.

Not so for our friends running in the Invisible Primary, because they are never through campaigning. If 2016 seems like a long way off, set your peepers on 2020 – because that’s when some of these folks will still be running for president. Think about it this way: Mittens ran in 2008 and 2012. Jeeze, Joe Biden ran in 1988 and in 2008, and that’s a looong time in between runs to constantly position yourself as presidential. These folks are in the positioning period right now, shoring up their leaderly legacies, mounting their accomplishments on their walls like the heads of dead hunted animals, all aiming to sell themselves as the big electoral winners.

And so we turn to this week’s most notable IP contenders to see how they are presenting themselves for public consumption.

#1: Ted “Ain’t No Squishie” Cruz: The Texas firebrand jumped to the front of the “Look at Me!” pack with this National Review article announcing his “consideration” of a presidential run. One Cruz associate (Cruzzy? Cruzite? Cruzzociate?) said “Ted won’t be opening an Iowa office anytime soon, but he’s listening.” Let me translate: “TED’S RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT! GIVE HIM MONEY!” Don’t believe me? The dude is going to South Carolina to campaign. The Palmetto State (besides being the home of the newly elected rep from the Philandering Phirst District – but more on that later) is one of the early presidential primary states, thus an important one to win.

Cruz seems to be grabbing our attention thanks to this analysis (or something along these lines) from my student Amazing Antonio: “Ted Cruz is big because Marco Rubio isn’t conservative enough for the wacknuts.” Truly, Cruz seems to be making his mark through the kind of agitator politicking that garners white-hot camera lights and truckloads of attention. The only hitch in the giddy-up for Cruz is that he has about 4 minutes of experience, which tends to piss off the gray beards in the party, but he can easily parlay his 2016 IP action into a Fox News gig (ala Palin & Cain) or use it to move the ball downfield for 2020. See? 2020.

#2: We move now to my boyfriend, Jumpin’ Joe Biden. Veep Bee is apparently mulling over yet another run for the top job, and we know this because… he’s going to South Carolina. Seriously, what on earth does this state have that I do not see? They just elected Mark Sanford. AGAIN! (but more on that later) Anyhoo, VeepBee is headlining a sold-out fundraiser in S.C. on Friday, which means the guy is presenting himself for public consumption. Of course, as everyone knows, the major wrench in his plans is going to be Hillary, whose maybe-maybe-not candidacy led to this absolutely side-slapping observation about a Biden pitch from political strategist Bob Shrum: “Because she’s a Democrat, I can’t say she’s the elephant in the room, but she’s certainly the dominant donkey.” Seriously, I love this stuff. I’m happy you’re in the game, Joe! It allows us to frequently use one of my favorite descriptive words about you: Avuncular.

#3: Finally, on to New Jersey Gov. Chris “Don’t Call Me Avuncular” Christie, who revealed that less than 2 weeks after a dust-up about his weight in February… he had gastric band surgery. Normally, this kind of thing falls under the heading of “Wait… why are we talking about this?” except that everyone was talking about his weight. This then means that doing something about it is some sort of indication that the Gov. is presenting himself for public consumption. Perhaps a poor choice of words. OK. Put another way, this revelation shows that Christie is cognizant of the chatter around him and wants to change the trajectory of the conversation. Mike Huckabee famously lost more than 100 pounds before his 2008 bid for president, and while that didn’t do very much for his electoral results it did sweep away the disparaging remarks and totally change the narrative. And the narrative in the IP is incredibly important.

Other IP players are doing the same sort of reconstruction of the fables (a tip of the hat to R.E.M.) to include Bob McDonnell of Virginia and Bobby Jindal ofLouisiana. Both of the Bobs are facing a wee-bit of trouble as they look ahead, but I think we will have to let that play itself out more before we address it here. See? Something to look forward to.

I would be remiss were I not to briefly discuss Mark Sanford’s SC-1 win last night. In a fun interview with the National Journal I said that his win was more about party politics (S.C.-1 being an R+11 district) than about the people actually liking Sanford – or about Sanford actually hosting a true comeback. I will not disparage the obviously troubled voters of South Carolina, but instead leave it to the genius Andy Borowitz who came up with this headline and this posting on the Borowitz Report: Sanford’s Comeback Gives Hopes to Liars. I leave this posting with the line I came up with yesterday but was not used in the Journal piece: "The Republicans of S.C.-1 were faithful to their party, even if it meant voting for a guy who wasn’t faithful to anybody.”

I really do love this stuff. Even if, at this time of the semester, I am exhaustipated.

Heritage, CPAC, and Stolen Underwear

            One of my favorite friends from college was Scott. He was (and likely remains) outrageously funny, smart, and sarcastic, and we lived in the same dorm for two years running. Our second year, having abandoned his loutish roommate, he moved all of his belongings into our second floor lounge and squatted there until the custodians locked him out of the room, but that’s a totally different story for another day. Scott came to St. Lawrence University from the Deerfield Academy boarding school, a tradition-rich WASP haven in New England whose motto is “Be worthy of your heritage.” We got several weeks into our first semester at SLU when Scott copped to the fact that he couldn’t do laundry, so we tromped downstairs to the basement of Reber Hall (rut roh!) where I meticulously explained the nuances of Tide and bleach. He had a look on his face that basically said: Isn’t this what we pay people to do? but I endeavored on. I was expounding on an astonishingly wide variety of underwear folding techniques when I stumbled upon a pair of his boxers that had the Deerfield motto and crest on the front, and on the tush was written: “Where the hottest party is the Grand Old Party.” 

            So I stole Scott’s underwear.

            Look, I was a Government major from DC, Reagan was in office, and this just killed me. All of my tee shirts and printed clothing read leftie things like: “Experts agree! Meese is a pig!” so finding something that was so gung-ho Republican was both totally different and really funny. I still have the boxers, and take them out when I’m feeling blue and need a laugh. This may be one of those boxer weeks, actually.

            Anywho, I was reminded of Scott’s underwear after my star-student Antonio sent me this cartoon about the future of the GOP in regards to the Invisible Primary. The Republican Party may very well remain the hottest at Deerfield but they seem to be losing their way off-campus, in no small part to their steadfast devotion to their own heritage. Since the cartoon references yet another Bush (that would be Jeb), we will begin with him and then get to the other members of the Sonnenkinder (that one’s for you Adam Rapp!).  

            We’ve heard a whole bunch from Jeb Bush lately, thanks to the release of his book “Immigration Wars” and the ensuing press tour that landed him on the Sunday morning chat shows. Since it seems fairly straight-forward that one I.P. technique is to write a policy book and hawk it to hell, Jeb was asked repeatedly about his 2016 prospects which brought this rejoinder to David Gregory of NBC: “Man, you guys are crack addicts. You really are obsessed with all this politics.” Umm… Jeb? Did you miss the briefing about what the Sunday morning shows are about? Because I have it filed away on my computer in my “patently obvious” file, right next to the documents titled “Congressmen want to be re-elected” and “Chocolate is delicious!” Back to his book, which is on immigration: His TV sales pitch led to a slew of headlines about whether or not his new immigration stand makes him more in-line with the GOP, a flip-flopper, or a back peddler. But this really was subtext for the big question about his 2016 intentions, and he added fuel to the fire by saying he would not rule anything out. Crack addicts indeed.

            Moving on to CPAC, since the conservatives arrive in DC this week for their annual bacchanal, the conference program is out and the speaking times have been listed by The Atlantic right here. Sen. Ted Cruz gets to speak for the longest amount of time (33 minutes) and after that, my girl Sarah Palin is allowed 16 minutes. Trump, Jindal, Paul, Perry, Rubio, Walker and Ryan each get just over 10 minutes each. I’m not sure if this means too much, but it does give insight to who the cool kids are on the right wing of the GOP. And only at CPAC does Donald Trump count as “cool.”And... Sarah Palin gets more time than the rest of those folks? Really? Moving on....

            Speaking of Sen. Rand Paul, his filibuster last week (the 9^th longest in history, apparently) garnered much I.P. attention, not only because he kept the floor for so long but also because he got great press because of it. Even though a few Republican stalwarts (Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham most notably) criticized the effort as “ridiculous,” Paul gained a ton of support from the likes of House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, and GOP strategist Steve Schmidt among others. We already knew that Paul the Junior has his eye on the 2016 prize and would lean forward into any spotlight, but as my favorite Uncle, Larry the Libertarian, notes: What made this special was the boost that Paul got from social media. According to the WaPo, Twitter was on fire with more than a million Tweets. Nicely noted, Uncle! It was this social media attention that brought what our marvelous Nicholas noted to be even more Senate attention from another I.P. favorite, Marco Rubio. Much jockeying for attention, Invisible Primary candidates! Well played!

And so now we double back to the conundrum facing the Grand Old Party: Being worthy of your heritage is not the same as being accessible to the electorate. That seems to be the biggest problem facing the Republicans as they march towards 2016. As Bill O’Reilly noted on Election Night (in terms far more crass than this) you can no longer win an election with just the WASP establishment behind you. You can bet your Gin & Tonics that the lack of ethnic diversity will be problematic for a party that is struggling to re-define itself, since Rubio and Jindal are the two clear exceptions to the white-guy rule seen in our I.P. front runners. But that said, into this void comes a bit of intellectual diversity where Paul in particular doubles-down on the libertarian strain of conservatism. We see this attention to the far right in the CPAC run-down, which (as noted) very specifically excludes a more moderate Chris Christie. Don’t yell at me – I know the “C” stands for “Conservative,” but still. The right wing of the Republican Party is hoping to add a little heat to the GOP.

Long live the Deerfield boxers.