Reply #7: We'd be better off if we STOPPED running Senators

[jmowreader]

The last two Democratic presidents were Jimmy Carter, a Southern governor who never held national office, and Bill Clinton, who had the same political background. (Their prepolitical backgrounds couldn't be more different.)

The last two Democratic candidates were Al Gore and John Kerry--both Senators. Both lost to a Southern governor who had never held national office before becoming governor--admittedly, the same Southern governor, but still!

Senators lose, sir, and they lose for three very specific reasons:

* Senators work as part of a team--the 100-person team that is the Senate. This means that no Senator has a record of individual accomplishment. A Senator may have written 100 good laws that were passed easily, but he or she didn't pass those laws alone--and if you're running against an incumbent president, any of those 100 good laws are going to be claimed by the incumbent as "his."

* Senators have easily-malleable records. We all know that a law is generally a mishmash of whatever they feel like throwing in there. If Senator Smith votes aye on a bill that's 99 percent good and 1 percent not-so-good, the opposition is going to advertise that Senator Smith voted for the one bad thing. Hell, you could write a bill freepers would love, one that gives every member of the Republican Party a free lifetime nationwide hunting/fishing license, allows you to deduct bird dogs from your taxes, eliminates bag limits on migratory waterfowl and declares Dale Earnhard's birthday to be a federal holiday and the right wing would be up in arms because you also implemented a 10-cent-per-box wildlife conservation tax on ammunition.

* Flip-floppin'. Senator Gray voted for a tax reduction because it was in a good bill. He voted against a tax reduction because it was in a bad bill. He voted for a tax increase because it was a very small part of a fantastic bill, and voted against one because it was a very large part of a horrid bill. Guess what Senator Gray is? A flip-flopper. You got it.

I don't like the idea of running congressmen or cabinet members either--congressmen are subject to the same problems senators have, and cabinet members are tied to the president they supported. Example of the last: Erskine Bowles. He was Clinton's chief of staff. He was kicking Richard Burr's ass until Burr decided to tie Bowles to Clinton. Now it's Senator Burr.

Governors are our best hope. Mike Easley in NC is supposed to be a potential contender next time.