A month ago, I tossed off a comment on Althouse that included the following lines:
So that leaves Obama and McCain. I wish they could run together. They’d be like one of those old 1970s cop shows. The crusty old seen-it-all guy who goes by his gut, partnered with the brilliant rookie whose got courage to match his brains.
They both seem like leaders to me. Contrary to extremely popular belief, the presidency is not an ideological office. The needed skills are inertia-busting on the domestic front, and strategic courage on the international front. Plus the right kind of ego, an ego strong enough to surround themselves with very smart advisors and encourage candor from them.
Both seem to have these skills. If they end up running against each other, I don’t yet know which way I’d go. But if only one of them is in the race, that’s the one I’m voting for.
I was sort of kidding. In the same comment, I discussed briefly my distaste for Hillary Clinton and at greater length my dislike of Mitt Romney.
Recently, Salon’s Edward McClelland wrote a column suggesting that guys are supporting Obama and/or McCain — just to keep Hillary Clinton out of the White House. His take-off point was my post:
John Stodder, a 52-year-old blogger from Palos Verdes Peninsula, Calif., looks at the presidential field and sees another buddy-cop pairing: John McCain and Barack Obama, supposed mavericks who break their parties’ rules, bound together by a common mission — keeping Hillary Clinton out of the White House.
“I wish they could run together,” Stodder swoons. “They’d be like one of those old 1970s cop shows. The crusty old seen-it-all guy who goes by his gut, partnered with the brilliant rookie who’s got courage to match his brains.
I give McClelland huge props for crediting me with the line. I think it’s funny. I don’t actually think the White House is like a grungy detective precinct in a gritty urban core. The fact that I like both candidates (Obama more than McCain) is incidental.
The fact that they’re both men has nothing to do with why I like them. I was prepared to vote for Sen. Clinton until this year despite some misgivings, until her campaign’s empty-headed and scurrilous nature became apparent.
You hear a lot about the failure of the Clinton “inevitability” strategy. In America, what else could such a strategy do but fail? “Vote for me because you have no choice” might work in Cuba or Iran, but not here.
Anyway, my little brainstorm got another push into potential meme-dom today on NPR’s “Wait…Wait…Don’t Tell Me.” Listen to the first couple of minutes. (And thank you to my wife’s aunt for happening across the show.)
It makes me want to blog some more!











4 responses so far ↓
scully // Sunday, March 2, 2008 at 4:12 pm |
HA! So that was you on WWDTM! Awesome.
Ray // Thursday, March 6, 2008 at 1:15 pm |
Glad you cleared that up (regarding the salon.com article). I personally think the writer’s point was poorly researched and extracted many “out of the blue” conclusions that irked me to no end.
Local // Wednesday, September 9, 2009 at 8:20 pm |
i totally agree ……………..
sandrar // Thursday, September 10, 2009 at 6:02 am |
Hi! I was surfing and found your blog post… nice! I love your blog.
Cheers! Sandra. R.