Back in April, The New York Times published an article titled “The Many Reasons to Run for President When You Probably Don’t Stand a Chance”. It was what I thought was an article timed perfectly -just as two dozen candidates where getting in the race- and it explained how many of them were not running for President, but were in fact running for VP or a cabinet post or -as our current President did- just to build up their national profile. The sentence that stuck with me most from the article was: “The case for: Why not?”
The case of “Why not?” applied four months ago. When nobody knew exactly which candidates would get traction. When nobody could have predicted Kirsten Gillibrand dropping out in August while the Mayor of South Bend, Indiana was fifth in the polls. When conventional wisdom dictated that people like Steve Bullock, the Governor of Montana, would be strong candidates; even if they didn’t win, they would raise their name recognition and would ride the wave to a high-level government position or a lucrative book deal.
We’re not in April anymore. We are four months away from the Iowa caucuses, and we have a pretty good sense -especially with the DNC’s brutal debate requirements- of which candidates are doing well, and which are on the path to being also-rans. I believe that there is no chance of anyone other than the top 5 becoming the nominee (Biden, Sanders, Warren, Harris and Buttigieg). They are strong in the polls, they have built incredible ground operations, they all have a huge war chest and -with the exception of Biden- they have all done well in the summer debates. But I do get why Cory Booker or Amy Klobuchar, or even Beto O’Rourke or Julian Castro are in the race. They can be holding out for that 0.0001% chance of becoming the eventual nominee, they can be jockeying for a top-notch position -which some of them are very likely to get- or they can be building momentum for either a future run or for higher office or, as stated above, a lucrative book deal. I do not understand, however, the thinking of Tim Ryan or Michael Bennet or Wayne Messam (yes, that is a real person). Are they really so stupid to think that they can still have their breakout moment? Or do they think that polling at 0% for a straight year is a good stepping stone to the Vice Presidency? (check out Martin O’Malley for the answer to that).
There are two people I want to congratulate. Stacey Abrams, you would have been a strong candidate but would not have won. You knew that. So you positioned yourself perfectly to be on the ticket or to be in someone’s cabinet. Kirsten Gillibrand, you kept it realistic. I applaud that. And to all of those who are “still running”: I would tell you to get the fuck out and leave the money and staff and media attention to the people who have the slightest chance of winning, but I am quite enjoying your pathetic attempts of topping your polling record of 1%.
Politics is Stupid. 