“We’ve Only Just Begun!” The IP Graduation Speech From Hell

‘Tis the time of year when chestnuts are roasting – not the kind of chestnuts that Bing Crosby sings about in December, but the old kind that gets tossed around graduation speeches like hacky sacks at a Further concert. Yes, these are the worn-out, unimaginative clichés that riddle university campuses, positioned right after the non-denominational prayer, right before the singing of the alma mater, right around the time the frat boys start to get woozy from the wake & bake and the sorority girls realize their shoe selection was unfortunate for a four hour event where most of it is spent standing.

The world is ahead of you.

Look forward, but also look back.

It is not the end, it is the beginning.

Life is a journey.

So true. So, so true. ALSO, so freakin’ stale they make my eyes roll reflexively. Thus, this IP posting will take these hackneyed phrases and put them to good use: to address the conundrum of how to “run” for office when you are not actually “running” for anything. Because you must walk before you run. And you will fly and soar as far as your wings will take you.

Good. Lord.

OK! Cliché Numero Uno: The world is ahead of you.

This one is dedicated to my girl, HRC, whose world now consists of her “transition office,” the nation of Libya, and the ten foot circumference around Sen. Rand Paul’s tuchas. The multi-perspective view of Hillary’s world begins at the same place but ends very differently: She is aiming for the White House using her experience as evidence of greatness, and Sen. Paul is aiming for the White House using her experience as evidence of skullduggery. The fun, of course, is in the spin. She says she done good as Sec State, he says she should be in prison. Potato, potahto. The interesting story to drop recently was that some of the big-wigs from Clinton’s 2008 campaign have begged off another chance at the gold ring, but as anyone who has visited my hometown knows: The place is lousy with big-wigs. And, apparently, locusts. But let’s not get distracted.

Cliché Numero Dos: Look forward, but also look back.

This goes out to IP fave Sen. Marco Rubio who has taken advantage of the IRS kerfuffle to propose an amendment to the upcoming 2013 Farm Bill (?) that punishes IRS officials who violate the constitutional rights of Americans. Sayeth the good Senator: “This IRS scandal has destroyed the American people’s confidence in this government institution and exposed the dangers of a large, unaccountable government operating under a President and administration that routinely intimidate and harass their political opponents.” Holy cats – knocking the administration AND the IRS in one fell swoop? Nice IP play, sir! Well done. Also, and I’m just whiffing here, it seems that throwing stones at the IRS today is sort of like proposing a Fight Club brawl with Olivia, your 6 year old niece. Who is blindfolded. Sorta easy, ain’t it?

Cliché Numero Tres: It is not the end, it is the beginning.

And hellllooooo NYC Mayoral Candidate Anthony Weiner! (You didn’t think I was gonna let this one go, didja?) I only have three things to say here: One, welcome to the race of a lifetime. Hot dog, this is gonna be FUN, even from the cheap seats. Do you think the New York Post just hired four new cover editors? Two, Congressman, I was wrong about Mark Sanford. But you are no Mark Sanford. Three, are you ready for more (much more) of this? I am proud that this video nugget was created by “a former student working in political consulting or advertising or whatever.” His words not mine, because I got clearance to give him a blind-item shout out. But anyway, Anthony, strap yourself in for more of this. Much, much more. And don’t say I didn’t tell you to wait.

Finally, Cliché Numero Quatro:  Life is a journey.

In this case, a journey to Israel. Mazel Tov to Democratic Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley who recently schlepped to the Middle East in order to talk shop with the chosen people, sharpen his Foreign Policy skills, and prove he’s got what it takes to run for the White House. We haven’t spoken about O’Malley in this blog YET but apparently this is an oversight. He went to Iowa (another designated IP destination) and he’s openly talking about 2016. A bold move from a bold man… that no one outside of Maryland has ever heard of. The good news: There’s still time!

And so graduates, faculty, proud parents, and blog readers: Keep reaching for the stars. You are the future, your education is just beginning, believe in your dreams and always remember: You did it. What you did is between you and your conscience, but I’m a liberal so I say go for it.    

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.

The Guessing Game

New Hampshire, which as we all know holds the First in the Nation Primary (if you didn't know, then look to their Constitution, which stipulates they go first no matter what), is apparently gearing up for 2016, and apparently New Hampshire voters know something the rest of us don't--who is running.

WMUR, in conjunction with the University of New Hampshire, has published, to great fanfare, their recent poll which shows who would win the New Hampshire Primary on the Democrat and Republican tickets.  That is, the 2016 primary.   Here is how it breaks down. 
For the Democrats, the clear winner is (drumroll) Hillary Clinton, who gets 61% of the support among those in the survey, followed by Joe Biden(7%), NY Governor Andrew Cuomo (3%), Deval Patrick, Governor of Massachusetts (3%), VA Senator Mark Warner (2%), Newark Mayor (and my personal favorite) Corey Booker (1%), and former Indiana Senator Evan Bayh (1%).

For the GOP, the clear frontrunners (at 15%) are KY Senator Rand Paul and FL Senator Marco Rubio, Followed by NJ Governor Chris Christie (11%), Paul Ryan (11%), NH Senator Kelly Ayotte (5%), former UT Governor Jon Huntsman (5%), FL Governor Jeb Bush (5%), Rick Santorum (4%), LA Governor Bobby Jindal (2%), Texas Senator Ted Cruz (2%), WI Governor Scott Walker (1%), and Ohio Senator Rob Portman (1%). I cannot fathom how Portman made the list other than his being in the news recently for coming out and admitting his love for his gay son (cue "Heather's" reference).  Why Rand Paul, you may ask?  Well New Hampshire has been the focus of the Free State Project, the decade long Libertarian strategy to move their numbers to a sparsely populated state in order to win elective office through strength in numbers.

And what is the basis to the survey?  507 New Hampshire adults, with a margin of error at +/- 4.4%, as well as 171 likely 2012 Republican Primary voters (+/- 7.5%) and 188 likely 2012 Democratic voters (+/- 7.1%)--"likely 2012 primary voters"??? I think they meant "likely 2016 primary voters".

But remember, it has nothing to do with scientific accuracy or the ability to measure the future, but instead about creating buzz so people tune in to the news reports (of which there are many), Tweet about it, and debate it on Facebook. And buzz equals profits.  And when we finally get to the Primary and the poll turns out meaningless, who is going to remember to call WMUR/UNH on it, and even if they did, who cares?

All we need do is look at a similar poll conducted by the same tandem back in 2006.  Again, 515 adults told us that the winner of the 2008 NH Primary would be...Hillary Clinton. Which they got right.  But who were her main challengers?  Closest was Senator John Edwards, VP Al Gore, Senator John Kerry, Joe Biden, General Wesley Clark, Governor Bill Richardson, and then once again, Evan Bayh and Mark Warner.  Why do NH Dems love these two relatively obscure Pols?  Not making the list? Senator Barack Obama, who had gotten a speaking spot at the 2004 Democratic National Convention had had lots of buzz around him. But nowhere on the list.  For the GOP--John McCain, Mayor Rudy, Governor Mitt Romney, Condi Ricee, Jeb Bush, George Allen, Rick Santorum, George Pataki, and even Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist.  No Mike Huckabee, who came in 3d in 2008.  No Ron Paul (Free State was still young), no Fred Thompson, etc.

What is remarkable about the most recent poll is how it is prefaced by reporters and pundits with the caveat: "The election is stilll more than 3 years away, and at this point this is mere speculation." Yet they feel compelled to talk about it anyway.

So chime in, dear readers.  Since there is no penalty for guessing, who is likely to win the 2016 NH Primary on the Democrat and GOP side of the ticket?

No! No! Don’t do that!

There are times in our lives when events conspire to make us stop and thump our heads against our desks in astonishment. People (not you savvy “Invisible Primary” blog readers, of course, but some people) make incautious errors, some people are socially tone deaf, and then there are those who are straight-up dum-dum, ass-hat nincompoops. According to no less a scholar than Big Bird, everyone makes mistakes: Your sister and your brother and your dad and mother too. Yes, everybody screws up… but mistakes are enormously fun to watch in the political realm.

Politics is a fecund field for the accident-prone, if only because of the spotlights and cameras that shine upon those who crave elected office. This means that a verbal slip-up or a miscalculation has the propensity for wide coverage. This is the force of the modern media, and it is the gift that brings us to today’s IP Media coverage: The unforced error. Several things hit my IP radar this week which made me bonk my head against my desk and yell “No! NO! Don’t do that!” to my computer screen. And so what I expect to be a long-running series, the first installment of what I will call “No! NO! Don’t do that!” (NNDDT! for short)

Our first NNDDT! Award goes to… former First Lady Barbara Bush.

I am not picking on Babs herself (she looks terrific, by the way) so don’t jump on me for carping on a civilian. Instead, I am giving the NNDDT! award for her comments about her son Jeb’s possible presidential run (See, Dave, I got there! Sometimes it just takes me a chatty while, as you well know). When asked by The Today Show’s Matt Lauer if she would like to see Jeb run, Barbara responded: “He's by far the best qualified man, but no. I really don't. I think it's a great country. There are a lot of great families. It's not just four families or whatever. There are other people out there that are very qualified. We have had enough Bushes.” I totally get that she’s a mom and she’s talking about another son going for another grueling campaign season and I appreciate her candor and her moxie and all that jazz… but the magic of editing just opened the door to every. single. oppo ad of 2016 featuring the quote: “There are other people out there that are very qualified. We have had enough Bushes.”

Mrs. Bush: NNDDT!

Or at least send Jebby a fruit basket with an apology note.

Moving right along, the second NNDDT! Award goes to… Sen. Rand Paul for taking the horrific Boston bombing and using it to throw a torx wrench into the nascent debate on immigration. The so-called “Gang of Eight,” which included IP fave Marco Rubio, had just unwrapped their immigration proposal when Sen. Paul sent a public letter to the media to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid urging: “We should not proceed until we understand the specific failures of our immigration system.” Good gravy. It makes me want to scream at my colleagues like a zealot. No wait – that was the two Chucks (Schumer and Grassley) over the head of poor Pat Leahy. Never mind. Anyway, it’s silly and you’re doing this to get attention and being obstructionist is no way to position yourself as a potential Free World Leader, so NNDDT!  

The next NNDDT! Award goes to… my man, former NY Congressman Anthony Weiner. Who went back on Twitter. And says there might be more saucy pictures of him out there. And he’s back on Twitter – I think this bears repeating. I suppose he might be trying to do it and get it out of the way, but this is no way to mount a comeback. Ha! OK, not enough? How’s this, from Stephen Colbert: “Weiner is ready to stick it back in. And that takes balls.” Better? Anyway, Weiner is going to face some stiff competition. And I suspect he’s going down. OK, I’m done now. But all of that said, he’s BACK ON TWITTER! Tweeting is not a necessity, by any means, not even a must for public office. And for Weiner, who had to resign from office BECAUSE OF TWITTER I suspect it is fraught with possible problems. I just cannot figure out what the heck he is doing, besides launching an effort to swell his support by intensifying and surging his popularity. OK, NOW I’m done. Is it hot in here?

Anywho: Anthony Weiner, put down the phone and as for Twitter…NNDDT!

The last NNDDT! Award goes to… former S.C. Gov. Mark Sanford who, after last week’s revelation that he broke into his ex-wife’s house, did the next most unconscionable thing: He took out an ad in the Charleston Post & Courier newspaper which began with the words: “It’s been a rough week.” Yes, Governor. It has. For the people for Boston and the people of Texas who had to suffer through real tragedy. And now you have just reminded people that you broke into your ex-wife’s house. Remember her? The one you cheated on with your current fiancé? Tone deaf. Senseless. Bonk, bonk, bonk. My head hurts too much to even tell you not to do that. Just please go away.

So those are the first of the NNDDT Awards. I suspect more will be on the way as our IP candidates hog the spotlight and step on their own… toes. Nominations will be accepted at this blog on a rolling basis. First come, first served.

OK. Now I’m done.

ALOT of Media Coverage

My students this semester are hilarious and terrific.
I have to admit that most of the time my students are hilarious and terrific, but this semester has brought classes full of sunny dispositions and meaningful questions - the most potent of academic combinations. Maybe there is something in the air: My friends and colleagues Niel Brasher and Mark Sachleben have also said their students this semester are fab.
But my students are better.

I was trying to define this "Invisible Primary" we write about, and the questions kept coming: "Does it really start RIGHT after the last presidential election?" Yes. "Do people REALLY pay attention to this?" Yes. "If this is all about getting attention, then isn't EVERY politician running for president?" No. Wait. Yes.

But a few folks are really running, and so I asked my students how they could tell the genuine contenders from the camera-greedy-solipsists who run amok in Our Nations Capital. They answered: "Because we hear from them ALOT."
See what I mean? I love these kids! Even the ones who routinely call me old. I'm talking to you, Trey.

Therefore, using "we hear from them ALOT" as the new media metric, right off the bat we turn to my man Marco Rubio on today's Sunday morning chat shows. In a tip of the hat to Passover, I ask: "What makes today different from any other day?" It ain't because he's leaning back. Au contraire: Dude is leaning FORWARD, doing what we refer to in the biz as "The Full Ginsburg." This is a shorthand way of saying Sen. Rubio went on ALL FIVE SHOWS in one morning, a bar-setting feat first accomplished by Monica Lewinsky lawyer William Ginsburg during the bar-setting political sex scandal. That in itself is a crap-ton of media, but apparently Rubio was also set to go on Univision and Telemundo just to round things out across demographic lines. I am going to give him today's IP "ALOT of Media" award for just showing up and presenting. Good Lord: I am tired just thinking about his day.

One of our sunniest and most meaningful students, Nicholas, caught the story that Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is off to the Granite State next month for a GOP fundraiser. Going to New Hampshire is one of the hallmarks of Invisible Primary action (First in the nation! Just ask them!), and the media coverage of his trip is going to be enormous. Already, the esteemed Economist published this piece about Jindal's presidential aspirations and included the joke that Jindal has been making about his White House dreams: “I mean, come on. What chance does a skinny guy with a dark complexion and a funny name have to get elected president?” Bobby: Don't make me go all Lloyd Bentsen on you and quote the 1988 Veep debate, OK. Comparisons are a dangerous game, mostly because so far the only guy you have been compared to is "Kenneth the Page" from 30 Rock. Just saying.

Finally, we are hearing about Rep. Anthony Weiner ALOT too, thanks to the NY Times piece that dropped today, which was a mammoth article filled with self-examination, therapy-laden contemplation, and not a small amount of  weltschmerz. His Invisible Primary has less to do with presidential politics and more to do with personal politics, but I have to, have to, HAVE TO link to this picture from the peerless New York Post cover, which portends Weiner's pickle should he decide to run. That's right. I wrote: "Weiner's pickle." I am officially a 12 year old boy.

So if the media metric says ALOT of coverage leads to IP significance, I'm going with these three as the week's big winners. The joy of the Invisible Primary is that the field expands and contracts to fit as many contenders as possible, all vying for ALOT of media attention. Good thing there is alot of media to attend to them.

A Visible Primary

I know that the focus of this blog is to investigate the Invisible Primary, the run-up to the real presidentials where candidates vie for media, mindfulness, and money. At times, however, when circumstances demand it, we have to veer off course and pay attention to a very real (and visible) primary election in order to more fully understand the political climate of our beloved IP.

And so our eyes turn to South Carolina, where (sigh) disgraced former Governor Mark Sanford has belied all of my predictions (sigh) and won the GOP special primary run-off election to fill the vacated 1^st congressional district.

Sigh.

To avoid a serious case of solipsism, I will not write endlessly about how I wrote this should never happen. Instead, I want to take a peek at the reasons Sanford won and the impact this win might have on Republican politics writ large.

First things first - the comeback kid. To recap events, just in case you weren’t paying attention the first time: When Mark Sanford was Governor of South Carolina in 2009 he disappeared over Father’s Day weekend, his security detail couldn’t find him, and his office staffers said he was hiking the Appalachian Trail. Turns out he was in Argentina visiting a woman-not-his-wife and when he finally returned all hell broke loose. Sanford kept his job, lost his wife, and gained a fiancé when the Argentinian lady came to the states and set up shop. He is currently on his political redemption tour, which apparently includes running for Congress. Voila: You are up to speed. So how the hell did Sanford win the primary? Well, it was a crowded field that was so crowded; a run-off was mandated because no one won a majority of the vote. Sanford is now pitted against Elizabeth Colbert Busch (comedian Stephen Colbert’s sister) in the special election to be held in May. She has money, momentum, and name recognition, and there’s a very real chance she will win.  

But South Carolina’s political flavor plays a big role here. The Palmetto State is red, red, red. The State Legislature and Governor’s Mansion are occupied by Republicans, and of the state’s seven US House members, only one (James Clyburn) is a Democrat. So there’s that. Also: Redistricting. Lonce and Chris have both addressed how redistricting plays important roles in shaping the election map, and so I will instruct our readers to look down-blog a bit for more info on this. Suffice it to say here, SC-1 is a very conservative district, one that Sanford himself represented before, one that has been redrawn to be even more right-leaning. In 2012, Mitt Romney won the district by 18 points. So it seems natural that a Republican would win (easily) here. BUT, you put this into the larger national conversation about the future of the GOP and there emerges a hitch in the giddy-up. Folks at the federal level are worried about losing this seat, and this brings us to the nationalization of this race and the tie-in to the IP environment.

As stated in an earlier posting, the GOP is up against a narrative that it is anti-immigrant, anti-poor, and anti-woman. Since Sanford’s fiancé is from Argentina, we will assume that he is pro-immigration, but since he humiliated his wife in the process of finding his true love there is a very decent chance the women’s vote is in play. Sanford tried to mitigate this damage by asking his ex-wife to run his new congressional campaign, a maneuver that undoubtedly made women everywhere say “Wait. Whaaaaa?” as they banged their heads against their desks.

Sigh.

Colbert Busch went immediately on the offensive launching ads after Sanford’s run-off win that accused him of being untrustworthy and anti-woman. This is a narrative that could not only gain traction against Sanford, but could also play a more considerable role in the national GOP. No one in the South Carolina delegation has endorsed Sanford, an indication of his unpopularity and of the baggage he would bring with him to the Republican Party. Apparently, national GOP figures are asking Sen. Tim Scott, who was appointed to the Senate and thus coughed up the SC-1 House seat, to endorse Sanford. But in 2009, Scott signed a letter that asked for Sanford to resign, saying Sanford’s actions had “reveal[ed] a pattern of poor decision making and questionable leadership.” Whoops.

And herein ties the SC primary race to the present conundrum of the GOP: The voters want candidates to stand for something, and to back up these stands with consistency and action. When the GOP says it is going to be the Kinder Gentler Party (version 2.0) and its representatives use terms like “wetbacks,” something smells amiss. Similarly, when GOP candidates and officials call for family values, I do not think they are calling for multiple families or situational values. I could be wrong about that. I am confident, however, that the party needs to appeal to a larger swath of the voting public, and seeming wishy-washy on their  stands and on their beliefs ain’t gonna cut it.

Sanford is, wisely, trying to frame this fight as a battle between a fiscal conservative and a tax-and-spend liberal, but Colbert Busch’s business experience may stymie that narrative. The Republicans, who are now positioning themselves for the 2014 midterms and the 2016 show, are keeping an eye on this race because it may prove to be a bellwether of things to come.

It is also fairly well certain that our Invisible Primary contenders will be watching the race to see if personal foibles actually do lasting political damage in our hyper-partisan, overly-mediated climate. As we navigate the unchartered media waters these things are, apparently, undetermined. Just a warning shot: If this portends a 2016 Weiner run, I’m outta here. 

Sigh.