Trending
Jim Newton
Itasca
Are we voters missing the boat when choosing lawmakers? It's almost impossible for us to absorb everything we need to know about potential leaders, but we remain fixated on charisma, ambition and campaign skills. The first two may be good for giving TED Talks, but aren't they better suited to campaigning than actual governing?
Adlai Stevenson II suffered two presidential landslide election defeats to popular Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956. I wonder, though, if Stevenson deserved better. Stevenson was a strong advocate for tackling world poverty and observed, "The whole notion of loyalty inquisitions is a natural characteristic of the police state, not of democracy." Such insight today would be refreshing--and rare.
I wonder how Republican Senators Robert Dole and John McCain would have done if their campaign savvy matched their governing skills. Few would question their qualifications for the White House.
Boxing trainer and TV analyst Gil Clancy once said that when a guy wins a title, he automatically becomes a 25% better fighter. Let's apply this thinking to politicians who might possess more governing than campaigning chops.
President George H.W. Bush, never particularly known for his dynamic stumping skills, looked more at ease behind the podium once he replaced President Reagan. He also appeared less dependent on handlers than Reagan, and calmly managed the first Gulf War.
If Clancy's 25% Boxing rule is true of leaders like Stevenson, Dole, McCain and other bygone campaign flameouts, maybe we should give them a closer look in 2028.