Never happen
A while back, I laid a lot of what I thought about current issues on the table in an effort to clarify some things. And to annoy readers. A few folks thought I should run for office. I could never successfully run for office for a variety of reasons and, honestly, I have no interest in doing so. As for reasons why I can’t run for office:
I’m not insanely rich – fact is that politics is a rich man’s game. Period. Even if I could muster the support, I doubt I could take the pay cut if I won.
I’m not very charismatic in person – I have a monotonous voice. I don’t speak well in front of a group. And I come across as a bit, err, cocky.
And if I did win, I couldn’t take the pay cut and would be above taking that crazy vote-buying money.
My position on gay marriage ensures that there is no office in my state that I could win.
I wouldn’t lie about my positions. And that is key. See, you have to give answers that appease both sides of the debate (unless one side is very clearly the dominate one – see gay marriage above) which means you typically don’t give answers at all.
I have admitted on this blog that I have:
My view on the war on drugs (declare victory and release the prisoners) would be spun as soft on crime.
I have a bit of a potty mouth and a temper. I can see my first debate now:
Opponent: blah blah toe party line blah blah give wishy-washy, non-committal answer blah blah 9-11 blah blah fags blah blah
SayUncle: Anyone in the audience have a shoehorn? My opponent needs it to remove his head from his ass.
Or I’d tell the distinguished gentleman from somewhere to go fuck himself.
So, sorry, it’s not going to happen because I (1) have no interest and (2) couldn’t win if I did.
July 5th, 2006 at 8:38 am
That’s a big problem with the whole structure of “government”: The people I’d trust with the reins of power have no interest in telling others what to do, and are therefore not trying to get elected to anything.
July 5th, 2006 at 9:09 am
Or as pro-drug, which is presumably worse. If they wanted to portray you as soft on crime, your opposition to the death penalty would be a more likely basis for that. It may not prevail, though; after all, if Death Penalty Central (VA) can elect a death penalty opponent (Tim Kaine) governor, I’m sure you could find a district somewhere in Tennessee where the druggies and the soft-on-crimies can join forces and muster a majority.
Even if it’s an office where your position on gay marriage would be irrelevant? If so, you’re totally hosed, as your combined positions on gay marriage and the Second Amendment probably make you unelectable anywhere.
July 5th, 2006 at 9:20 am
Heh. True dat.
July 5th, 2006 at 9:41 am
Or be painted as anti-law enforcement
July 5th, 2006 at 10:59 am
I don’t know. There was a guy who admitted taking drugs, bragged about all kinds of wild sexual adventures, even appeared in some porn photos, cussed a lot, and who some people have a hard time understanding when he talks. He’s also an anti-tax, anti-big-government, pro-choice, pro-environment, pro-gay, pro-gun control, Republican.
He’s now Governor of California.
July 5th, 2006 at 11:21 am
You can’t run for office if you’ve had a life.
Life is messy. Decisions are hard sometimes. The only people who would understand are the 98% of the voters who have had a life….but they’ll never admit it at the ballot box.
July 5th, 2006 at 2:26 pm
Unc, on blog and others I’ve copped to being an atheist. Talk about political poison.
July 5th, 2006 at 2:40 pm
That would be “on this blog.” No good sleepy, no good typey.
July 5th, 2006 at 8:26 pm
Arnold won because he’s the Terminator. Anyone less famous would have had no chance.
July 5th, 2006 at 11:19 pm
Les:
You beat me to it. I’ve gotten the “you should run for office” thing just like Uncle has, but as an avowed atheist, no amount of money could buy me an office.
July 5th, 2006 at 11:28 pm
Manish:
Arnold also won because of California’s asinine recall system. In a real election cycle, I’m not even sure he survives the primary process.
July 5th, 2006 at 11:29 pm
Xrlq:
Wouldn’t Death Penalty Central be Texas? I’m pretty sure they list executions in the sports section there…
July 6th, 2006 at 7:00 am
TGirsch, it depends on how you measure. Texas is a much bigger state, so of course they have more total executions than Virginia, but that’s a lousy way to measure. When you control for population size, the two are pretty close, but IIRC Texas still “wins” that race by a slight margin. But that’s not the best yardstick, either, since the two states do not have comparable murder rates. Once you control for that (Texas’s is significantly higher), I’m pretty sure you’ll find we execute a slightly higher percentage of our killers than they do.
July 6th, 2006 at 8:30 am
[…] On my post about why I’d never run for office, AC touches on something I meant but didn’t explicitly say: I think one of the answers of getting more folks running for office is to demolish the two party system. […]