Someone else has noticed it: Within a lot of vague talk about “Washington is broken” and “a new generation”, there really isn’t much reason for Joe Kennedy III to be running for Senate. Except, of course, for the fact that he took a poll, and the poll told him his last name was Kennedy.
Seriously … Is anyone getting much off of this?
“Because our system is broken,” he said at the start of an interview on Thursday night. “And I think the moment we’re in demands that people do everything they can to try to fix it. And that’s making sure that the voices out there that feel like they are left out, cut out, taken advantage of, looked over, not part of that system — that they’ve got a senator out there that’s going to meet them where they are, that’s going to show up, that’s going to champion those voices.”
You’ll notice that exactly none of this has anything to do with a.) any shortcomings, real or alleged, of the incumbent Ed Markey; or b.) the strengths, real or alleged, of Joe Kennedy. He’s trying to sound like Ayanna Pressley … which he is not. It’s not at all clear what he would bring to the Senate: what particular policy background; what demographic representation; what enduring cause or undying dream.
At least with Markey, I know a handful of things for which he’s going to fight:
- Green New Deal. It is his life’s work — now with a youthful grassroots upsurge, and a charismatic partner in Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (whose name Markey clearly enjoys dropping). It is a sweeping policy blueprint on the existential threat to humankind and the most comprehensive political challenge certainly in my lifetime. Ed took it on; he’s ready to do the work; he’s done it before.
- Opioids. Markey recognized the opioid/fentanyl crisis relatively early on, in 2014. He has consistently advocated for the wider availability of Narcan to first responders, which can prevent overdose deaths; and for more treatment beds.
- Internet: Safety, privacy, and freedom. Ed’s Privacy Bill of Rights, modeled on European Union protections, has garnered praise from the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Free Press Action:
“Senator Markey’s bill will help enable people to use the internet without fear of exploitation or discrimination from companies intent on mining their private data. People must have the right to safely choose who they give their personal information to and need enforceable rules over how it can be used.”
He has co-written privacy protections for kids — a bipartisan issue, as it turns out. And he has fought back against Patriot Act intrusions of privacy via cell phone carriers.
This also includes Markey’s leadership on Net Neutrality, which is more than a consumer protection — it’s a linchpin of democracy itself. And given Elizabeth Warren’s eagerness to take on Facebook and Big Tech generally, one can hardly imagine a more valuable legislative wingman for a President Warren.
- Consumer protection. On sketchy cable fees, including set-top boxes; on robocalls; and on and on and on. He’s always on top of these.
Markey embodies public service: A rather simple and old-fashioned idea that government should protect the ordinary person against the wealthy and predatory. He represents the bridge between the 1970’s post-Watergate, Unsafe At Any Speed era; and our own era of Trumpian corruption, social media disinformation, and endless data breaches. He is constantly engaged in these fights, big and small — whether anyone notices or not. He brings knowledge, expertise, and professionalism to his work — each of which is under attack in this corporate/Trumpist era.
Now, dealing with the threat of global warming is by far the most important of these. Perhaps I am mixing rah-rah political exhortation (Go Ed!)with the prophetic, judgmental mode: “The end is nigh, wake up you dumb @#$%” — but under the exceedingly grim circumstances, I won’t apologize for that. And I reject jconway’s dismissal of the climate movement as “lily-white”, or of the issue as something distant. Both assertions are false. The youth climate movement is multi-cultural, and in fact largely female-driven. And the consequences of global warming will be borne wildly disproportionately by the most vulnerable among us — right here: The poor; the urban; the Central American refugee (for example). Furthermore the economic program of Green New Deal is aimed to benefit those who have been left out of our economy today. This is a program meant to be rolled out and executed within the next ten years, as the exigency of climate change requires. It is real; it is now; it is tangible; and it is equitable — finally.
So I know why we need to send Ed Markey back for another term — especially this coming term, hopefully with a President Warren (et al) and a Democratic Senate.
Joe? I don’t know — and I’m not sure he does, either.
jconway says
Let’s be crystal clear. I know the climate stakes. My wife’s family in the Philippines and the billions of people who live in the Southern hemisphere will be on the business end of climate change, thanks to those of us in the North. I get that it will cause a massive refugee crisis if it has not already.
This interview with Marima White Hammond is illuminating. This is definitely an issue for people of color, it is not yet an issue by people of color. She is trying to change that. So are the students you spoke so highly about, but I am fairly certain your bike rides, Sierra Club meetings, and the people vocally backing Markey on twitter fall into the white suburbanite who drives a Prius demographic.
I’m sorta in that demographic and I am not maligning it’s good intentions, but I also think there is desperately needed room for intersectionality in that movement and the progressive movement more broadly. You and other Markey backers are closing the movement rather than opening it by isolating this issue by itself focusing on it as the existential crisis for our times.
It is, but so are other issues. For the kids facing gangs in their schools, the gun and crime issue is more existential to their lives. For the kids who’s parents are deported, stopping ICE is more important. For our troops overseas caught in the crossfire between Turkey and Russian backed Syrian forces, foreign policy and national security are important. For blacks facing racist cops, stopping police violence is more important. For union workers losing their rights and their jobs, their issues are more important.
Progressives win when we build big coalitions that bring together all the stakeholders and push them forward in a bold and comprehensive vision. The Green New Deal could do that if argued as a jobs program, if its AOC staffers talking about why eating meat is evil, its a loser. If its Joe Kennedy talking about bringing solar jobs to Fall River, its a winner.
Joe Kennedy is a better advocate for progressives because he is being endorsed by Gateway City leaders like Kim Driscoll in Salem, Judy Garcia in Chelsea, and lawmakers in places like the South Coast, Worcester County, the Cape, and Western MA which have been trending Republican. You want someone who can help advance climate policy-you need someone who knows how to talk to voters of color, purple voters, and even red voters and get them on the same page. Someone who can cut through the right wing noise and talk to the white working class. The IBEW and SEIU endorsed Kennedy can do that, Markey cannot. You need to build a coalition to win.
Markey did that exactly once in his career when he won his first House race 43 years ago, its been a long time since he’s done that in Congress or on the campaign trail. Kennedy has a record of getting things done with Republicans, a record of bringing different stakeholders to the table, and a national profile to lead on the issues that matter.
Charley on the MTA says
Show me where SEIU endorsed?
jconway says
Too late to edit comment, SEIU still neutral. IBEW did endorse Kennedy, they made a smart bet on Pressley before.
Charley on the MTA says
Saw that – definitely a nice get for JK.
SomervilleTom says
He’s playing identity politics.
JKIII is the canonical “privileged white”, and I find his pandering to minority communities exploitative and insulting to them. At least Ayanna Pressley is herself a member of the community she so passionately advocates for.
To me, this campaign is spiraling into pure demagoguery.
So far as I know, the last black Senator we elected in Massachusetts was Edward Brooke, Mr. Brooke left office in 1979, defeated by Paul Tsongas.
The very fact that we have not elected another black Senator in thirty years is itself compelling evidence of the racism rampant throughout Massachusetts.
I’d like to know how much time, effort, and money JKIII has invested in minority communities of Massachusetts mentoring young men and women of color to join him in national office. I’d like to see a list of proteges whom he has helped gain power and influence.
Does JKIII empower minorities and people of color by using his skills, resources, and connections to recruit and lift up members of those communities, or does he instead beat the bushes creating photo-ops and adulatory headlines for himself?
I view this campaign by JKIII as making the reality of racism in Massachusetts worse, not better.
jconway says
Not sure where all that is coming from. I bet Pressley, Patrick, or Pemberton would all do well running statewide. Pemberton probably won’t win this race, but he’d make an interesting candidate for governor down the line. I think Joe is talking about immigration and economic and social justice more than Markey. He’s only talking about climate justice-that intersects with those issues but it’s not the only way racial and economic justice is affected.
Providing better social services, providing housing, providing good pay jobs, there’s a lot our government could be doing that it’s not. Like Warren, Kennedy is talking about many different issues and his plans for them.
Christopher says
You’re about a day behind in the news. Pemberton has ended his Senate campaign. He has an inspiring story and would make a great candidate and elected official a few rungs down the ladder at first.
jconway says
I just saw that and agree wholeheartedly. It’s a shame he feels he was shut out of this primary process, critics of the system have a point.
Christopher says
Has any black person other than Jack E. Robinson even run for Senate recently, or been in a position to?
SomervilleTom says
@ Has any black person … run for Senate recently?:
No. That’s my point.
I think the interests of the minority community are much better served by a member of that community — like Ms. Pressley — than by a wealthy white man who feels entitled to the office because of his pedigree.
Christopher says
Haven’t you at other times scoffed at Pressley as an identity candidate? I think the issue is not so much a function of racism as it is how safe incumbents tend to be. I deliberately added the words “or in a position to” because one generally doesn’t just jump into a Senate race from nothing. Jack E. Robinson’s problem wasn’t his race; it may have been his party, but mostly his name recognition is such that some people probably wondered if he were the guy who broke the MLB color barrier (and in fact I almost spelled his name like the ballplayer in the above comment).
jconway says
Yeah I find the same flip flop puzzling, I welcome it though. I think a big reason Kennedy is running now is because he knows Ayanna’s the front runner for the Warren seat when it becomes vacant. They’ve been a great tag team against Trump on immigration and would make a fine pair of Senators for the Commonwealth. Particularly if Warren wins. A man can dream.
Christopher says
I guess I would have predicted Kennedy a frontrunner of Pressley, but I agree having both of them would be great.
jconway says
You can support one of them now you know 😉
Christopher says
I need a really good reason to dump a Dem incumbent though.
SomervilleTom says
@Haven’t you at other times scoffed at Pressley as an identity candidate?:
I don’t like identity politics. I especially don’t like identity politics as the primary driver of a campaign or candidate. I am still waiting for Ms. Pressley to show substance behind her rhetoric and speechifying.
Regardless of my feelings about that, Ms. Pressley she at least has standing as a black woman to advocate for the cultural communities she represents. She has lived in the community she represents, and has always been very involved at the local level. That is an important strength of hers.
JKIII is also playing identity politics — and doing so as a Kennedy. It is the dissonance between his own personal identity and the identity politics he practices that I dislike.
I get that such identity politics is pretty much his only choice in this 2020 Senate primary because the incumbent he seeks to unseat is already strong on all or most of the issues that JKIII might otherwise focus on.
I don’t see it as a flip-flop. I see it as dealing with the reality of candidates as they are rather than as I might like them to be.
jconway says
I completely agree. I’ve been quite clear she’d have my vote over Ed Markey. So have many of his backers, which is why I find their experience argument to ring hollow.
SomervilleTom says
@Ms. Pressley for Senate:
Of the following three choices for the US Senate seat in 2020:
– Ed Markey
– Joe Kennedy III
– Ayanna Pressley
I have a strong preference for Mr. Markey. Ms. Pressley is a distant second, and Mr. Kennedy is well behind Ms. Pressley in my ranking.
I think I’ve said before that I like Ms. Pressley. I think she might well make a fine Senator after she establishes a track record as an effective member of Congress.
I’ve seen JKIII’s record in Congress, and it is based on that record that I support Mr. Markey.
jim-gosger says
It’s because Massachusetts deserves a Senator who understands, cares about and shows up for issues that are local as well as national and international. Remember the last time we had a Senator Kennedy? That’s the kind of Senator I want, not just one that appears at election time.
doubleman says
JKIII’s case for fixing a broken system and a new kind of leadership would be a lot stronger if his campaign wasn’t funded by major donors and backed by incredibly mediocre establishment figures like Joe Crowley.
Markey is not great on this stuff either, but he’s not the one talking about fixing a broken system as a core pitch.
I wish I could embrace jconway’s thinking that he will be a stronger leader on progressive issues. He will certainly have a greater national profile than Markey would, but on what progressive issues? He is a slight step back on many from Markey.
Is JKIII going to be an unrepentant supporter and leader on issues that actually challenge power (on health care, on climate, on criminal justice reform, on general corporate power) or is it going to be more platitudes about “bringing people together”? His record ain’t so good so far.
pogo says
Your mention of Markey’s efforts around the opioid crisis as another reason he deserves reelection. As politicians go, Markey has been a strong advocate for solving the opioid crisis and, as politicians go, he should be commended.
But the opioid crisis began more than 15 years ago. As early as 2004, opioid “poisoning” (as they called it then) deaths had very healthy percentage increases every year in MA (and no doubt his CD district)…doubling every few years until it really snowballed. There were some folks sounding the alarm, then St Sen / now MA AFL-CIO Pres. Steve Tolman being one of them. But nothing from our political leaders at the top. Only when VT Gov Sudilin (spelling) in 2013 devoted his State of the State address to the crisis and the NYT did a big story on it, did the bandwagon of “woke” politicians start moving slowly on this issue.
Yes, Markey was one of those on the bandwagon in 2014. But the larger question is: why didn’t our political establishment understand sooner that a slow moving crisis was moving through the country? Perdue Pharma pled guilty the first time in 2007 for lying about the dangers of Oxy’s to doctors! The DEA was fining distributors regularly for poor or nonexistent controls over opioid drugs.
But the politicians–by their inactions–didn’t care. It was business as usual for most politicians until the media (FINALLY) started writing about the problem and politicians kicked into survival instinct and jump on the bandwagon.
Ed Markey is part of this establishment. A 43 year veteran of working in a system that is oblivious to what is happening in neighbors all around the country–including their districts. Now it’s been said in a previous post that I just hate incumbents and someone said I criticize all politicians. Well I feel neither is true. What I’m disgusted with is a political system that either ignored or was incapable of reacting to the opioid tragedy that so far has claimed 400,000 Americans…many never seeing the age of 25.
Ed Markey, and members of Congress and Governors serving in the aughts failed “we the people”. They–for whatever reason–failed to stop a completely preventable public health disaster. You can cite XYZ bill he filed or ABC law he passed around the issue of opioids, but in the big picture, he, along with many others, failed the people. And it is the systematic failure of our political system, warped by political contributions and lobbying, that needs to change and that requires politicians with guts. Ed Markey has done nothing to show me he has those kinds of guts.
For example, I’m been advocating that all the Senate candidates should start off with the same amount of money in their campaign account: Zero. That is the fair and equitable thing to do. The day Ed Markey embraces that–which is obviously against his interests, but is in the interest of a more fair election–and donates his $4 plus million in previous campaign contributions to charity, is the day I’ll pledge my support for him. (And the same is true with Kennedy. And right know, I don’t know who I’m voting for. I very well my blank that vote.) I just don’t think rewarding a status quo candidate will move the ball ahead.
jconway says
You don’t need to blank. Riordion and Pemberton are also interesting candidates if you feel underwhelmed by the the Irish guys.
I think the skill set of a Senator is different from a house member. Markey can and did get away with being a niche issue Congressman for 36 years since he never faced a competitive election in his entire career. Advancing a few causes is fine for a House member, a Senator needs to represent the entire state and all of its issues.
It’s there I feel Markey’s leadership has been lacking and Kennedys deliberate focus on the forgotten corners of the state inspiring. He isn’t running to replace a bad incumbent, to wit most of the negativity and cheap shots in this race have been directed Kennedys way.
I’ve never said Markey has done a bad job, I just think Kennedy will do a better one. Joe simply wants to upgrade our Senator to a 21st century communicator with better statewide and national reach. I think it’ll be an upgrade in day 1. It’s sad Markey didn’t get the hint and retire early, but that’s what primaries are for.
Christopher says
Get what hint? Are you suggesting that the mere fact of a challenge mean he should fold his tent?
jconway says
Typically incumbent senators get easily re-elected, especially around here. Markey hasn’t had to fight for a seat since 1976. There was no way pro-life Lynch was winning a statewide Senate primary, and Gomez was a statewide no name hated by half his party and still managed to hold Ed to single digits.
Ed’s just not a good campaigner or retail politician, and it’s part of the reason why he deserves to lose. His limp last minute co sponsorship of the Green New Deal belies the fact he needed AOC’s star power more than she needed his single term of senate seniority. You bench Bledsoe so Brady can play and win Super Bowls. I think this applies here. They vote the same, play for the same team, but one guy has the talent to be a long term asset for the state in the Senate.
SomervilleTom says
Football is a game where age is a weakness. Politics is a field where age is an advantage.
This comparison between Drew Bledsoe and Tom Brady exemplifies my prickliness towards what I see as your age bias.
I honestly don’t know or care enough about about football to know which was the better player when they competed for the same position. I do know enough about politics to know which I think is the better politician.,
I don’t like it that you seem to favor youth for youth’s sake in candidates. That’s the aspect I don’t like.
jconway says
I don’t always favor youth. I’m backing a septuagenarian for president over a guy who’s just six years older than me. I backed Jehlen over Cheung and would back her again against anyone who ran against her.
I think they have identical votes on the issues and Markey just hasn’t impressed me as much as Joe Kennedy. The opposite is true for you, but part of that was you encountered Markey during his first race when he was the young gun taking on the old establishment.
SomervilleTom says
Understood.
I want us to avoid getting too polarized about this. It won’t be the end of the world for me if JKIII wins the nomination, and I suspect the same is true for you if Mr. Markey wins.
A significant part of my responses to you here actually has very little to do with you and very much to do with my own Kennedy fatigue. I spent most of my adult life defending the indefensible after the tragedy at Chappaquiddick. I very much supported Ted Kennedy’s politics, and I agree that he became a great politician. I have never made peace with the events of Chappaquiddick.
I’ve therefore enjoyed the almost ten years that it’s been with no Kennedy in the national spotlight. I prefer that it stays that way. That’s my baggage, though, and I own it.
SomervilleTom says
@jconway:
I have another comment in the pending queue, apparently put there because I referenced the island where the tragedy happened in 1969. Apparently the new filter flags ANY occurrence of d-i-c-k in a comment. I don’t see anything else in my comment that might trigger it.
Christopher says
Yeah, I saw the comment and don’t find anything objectionable. Paging editorial intervention to soften the moderation. This must be new because surely that island, along with W’s VP, have been mentioned numerous times on BMG in the past.
SomervilleTom says
I just attempted to post a comment whose text was the name of the island in question. That comment went to the moderation queue.
This new filter looks like an example of a cure that is much worse than the disease.
jconway says
I saw it and found nothing objectionable, I actually appreciated your thoughtful reflection.
I am not the biggest fan of the Kennedys to be honest. I share the modern MeToo concerns about their behavior toward women, the issue with the 1969 incident tarnishing Ted’s legacy, and Jack being a somewhat overrated president. Bobby remains a hero of mine, I have his sticker on my desk in class.
I think his son was a mediocre Congressmen, but his grandson has stayed away from many of the vices of the family. I like that he speaks Spanish, had a gay roommate who is one of his best friends, has a nice family, married a Methodist PK like I did and does not have the Catholic baggage either, and his relationship to Sen. Warren. He’s impressed me when I met him and when I see him on television. Markey brushed me off last time we met. He was very thoughtful the first two times we met in 2004. I do feel he’s lost a step, but get that people value their relationship to him and think Joe is an upstart.
It’s not the end of the world either way. I do hope we do not raise the stakes too high. I reject the notion that climate change won’t be a priority of Kennedy, and also reject the notion that Markey does not share Kennedys focus on the humanitarian crisis at the border. Let’s let them debate it all out and see where the votes fall.
SomervilleTom says
At the end of the day, either candidate will be far superior to any GOP candidate I’ve seen in my lifetime.
SomervilleTom says
@I share the modern MeToo concerns about their behavior toward women:
Ted Kennedy had a serious alcohol issue during much of his life, and was famously abusive towards women — especially staffers and campaign volunteers — during those years.
Several women that I was close to at the time described an incident in the 1980s in a luxury suite at a downtown Boston hotel. They reported that a drunken Ted Kennedy sat slumped in an armchair facing a large window while a progression of young women volunteers and interns knelt before him performing oral sex. My friends said that it was understood by every woman in the room that this was necessary in order to have any access to Mr. Kennedy at all.
I’m glad that Ted Kennedy was able to fight back from this low period in his life. He was man who suffered enormous losses early in life, compounded by a severe and chronic back pain resulting from injuries sustained in a 1964 plane crash.
By the 1990s, he was genuinely a lion in the Senate. By the late 1990s, his office was legendary for its superb constituent service, especially for constituents facing immigration issues with the federal government.
Very few men and women are able get comparable opportunities to recover from their failings. Most black men are jailed for offenses far less severe than Mr. Kennedy’s lapses.
In my view, the quality of our Massachusetts House and Senate delegation has dramatically improved since Mr. Kennedy’s 2009 passing. I have not been impressed with the governance of any of the descendants of the famous Hyannisport family. I am perhaps overly cynical, but I don’t think any of them would have won office without the benefit of their pedigree.
I am weary of our culture’s apparent enthusiasm for creating political dynasties. I’m glad that Chelsea Clinton has chosen not to run for Congress in this cycle — I’m as weary of the Clintons as I am of the Kennedys. I think the administration of George W. Bush shows that parentage did not prepare or qualify him for public office. I draw a similar learning from the collapse of his brother Jeb’s political career.
If Democratic voters of 2020 choose JKIII as our next Senate nominee, I will shrug and move on.
jconway says
I think everything you said is fair. I’d encourage you to meet Joe Kennedy if you can. He’s very unlike the stereotypical Kennedy heir. Including his old man and uncles.
SomervilleTom says
Chappaquiddick
SomervilleTom says
Here is my comment that was suppressed yesterday. I’ve edited the offended word, replacing it’s two occurrences with “the-island-that-must-not-be-named”.
Understood.
I want us to avoid getting too polarized about this. It won’t be the end of the world for me if JKIII wins the nomination, and I suspect the same is true for you if Mr. Markey wins.
A significant part of my responses to you here actually has very little to do with you and very much to do with my own Kennedy fatigue. I spent most of my adult life defending the indefensible after the tragedy at the-island-that-must-not-be-named. I very much supported Ted Kennedy’s politics, and I agree that he became a great politician. I have never made peace with the events of the-island-that-must-not-be-named.
I’ve therefore enjoyed the almost ten years that it’s been with no Kennedy in the national spotlight. I prefer that it stays that way. That’s my baggage, though, and I own it.
Christopher says
So apparently we now have “Voldemort Island” off the coast of Massachusetts!:)
Christopher says
Wait a second – if anything the first sentence of your second paragraph is a bug rather than a feature in this experiment we call self-government. Running for office and serving in office are two very different skill sets and if anything it is sometimes appropriate to overlook flaws in the former if you know the person will be much better at the latter. Markey has also been on board with some of the principles of the GND since before AOC was born.
jconway says
I think that’s part of the problem. He’s been singing the same song for so long, but few of his colleagues care to listen. I think Kennedy has a bigger microphone and a better bully pulpit to push for Markey’s single issue and the seamless garment of social and economic justice issues Kennedy cares about.
pogo says
Pemberton dropped out this week, citing the huge financial and institutional advantages that Kennedy and Markey have against mere mortals trying to run for office. The little I knew of Pemberton sounded impressive. Maybe he was shooting a bit high in running for US Senate, but the voters should have decided that. Not the institutional rules of the game that gave Markey and Kennedy a $4 million head start on anyone else.
jconway says
Yeah that’s a real disappointment. He’s got a better case to make for Governor, so maybe he goes for that.
Christopher says
“The poll told him his last name is Kennedy” – good one!
jconway says
Or that despite 46 years as a benchwarmer in both houses of Congress, nobody knows who Ed Markey is. It is a ruthless move, but politics is a ruthless game and I defend it. If we want our state to continue to produce nationwide Democratic talent we should want our talent to rise to the top instead of waiting in line for old men to die or retire. It would be great if our statehouse saw similar trends. If one ever uttered “we have term limits-they are called elections”, then one has to concede this primary is legitimate. I predict Markey will lose and by wide margins.
Christopher says
There’s a reason he’s been there 46 years and frankly it sounds like you’re more attracted to showhorses than workhorses. He doesn’t have to be flashy to get stuff done and I don’t understand why you have always been so bitter about him. I do simultaneously believe that elections are natural term limits and this particular primary isn’t necessary.
jconway says
Go back to 2014 and I argued Markey was the workhorse Warren needed to be partner with to get stuff done in the Senate. He hasn’t gotten anything done in six years. A lot of talk, not a lot of action. The GND is a great example of a showhorse bill since it had a lot of flaws in it and has zero prospects for passage. Selling it as a climate bill dooms it in the Senate. Selling it as a jobs bill, as Kennedy has, and as I urged Markey to do, is the way to win and actually get it done. With the Conor Lambs in our caucus and some Republicans in theirs passing it.
jconway says
How many times did he face real competition? I for one am glad the days of incumbents coasting to 90% wins in the primary and general against “blank” are coming to an end in this state. If Markey wins this primary he will have more than earned re-election and he’ll have my full support in the general, but making him campaign for a change isn’t the planetary catastrophe his supporters are making it out to be.
Christopher says
Why do you hold being lucky with his lack of contest against him? It’s not like that’s his fault and it may even mean people are satisfied.
SomervilleTom says
Ronald Reagan won the presidency by a landslide. His dismantling of education programs, in particular, was very popular and members of congress who supported it won by wide margins.
Surely you agree with me that the resulting policy was bad governance and bad for America.
A wide margin in an election means that a candidate is good at playing to what the audience wants. It does not necessarily mean that replacing the incumbent with the winner leads to good government. I am far more interested in good government than good campaigning.
Sadly, I will not be surprised if your prediction comes to pass. I think we will all be much the worse for it.
jconway says
Reagan was the Great Communicator which is why he was able to sell his terrible policies under the sunny phrasing of Morning in America and Let’s Make America Great Again. AOC is a great communicator. Kennedy can sell a climate plan as a jobs bill for Middle America. He has persuasively made the case we fight for both. I think that’s a compelling vision and one voters across the spectrum will resonate with. I think Markey makes climate hawks happy while winning over fewer converts to the cause than Kennedy can. Kennedy also emphasizes other issues affecting people besides climate. I think its a better package and one that can restore a coalition.
SomervilleTom says
It sounds as though you agree with me.
Mr. Reagan’s success as the “Great Communicator” resulted in absolutely TERRIBLE governance. A lesser communicator would perhaps not have been able to put the policies of those facile names into practice — America would have been better off as a result.
Any representative democracy will always require a balance between political and governing skills. I am reminded of a learning from the business world, which must maintain a similar balance between advertising and product quality. A very effective way for a company to learn about the product weaknesses of a competitor is to watch the advertising and marketing of that competitor
Whatever it is that advertising and marketing hypes is often the greatest weakness of the product. That’s because the positive aspects of most products sell themselves and don’t require explicit mention.
A product that advertises its “reliability” is likely to fail. In the current market, Maytag is among the least durable and least reliable appliance manufacturer. This explains the spate of silly Maytag advertising flooding commercial breaks these days.
My point remains that voter enthusiasm for the political celebrity of the day does not mean that the governance of those celebrities is any better. In some cases, it means just the opposite.
Not to belabor it, but isn’t Beto O’Rourke exhibit A in my case?
jconway says
I’m saying if we want progressives to win we need progressives who are effective at communicating their plans for the country. Warren is. Kennedy is. Markey is not.
SomervilleTom says
I agree.
I also suggest that communication is irrelevant in the absence of a message to communicate.
I know that I agree with the substance that Ms. Warren communicates. I also know that I agree with the substance of what Mr. Markey communicates, even if inexpertly.
I don’t yet see much substance in Mr. Kennedy beyond his messaging, and that’s my concern about him.
Christopher says
You seem to be overselling communication as a skill. It helps to be sure, you seem to be relegating the Senate to a debating society.
jconway says
Mitch McConnell has relegated the Senate to a debating society. So in that environment, someone who gives great speeches on the floor, is a regular visitor on the Sunday and cable shows, and crisscrosses the entire state on a regular basis is a better quality in a Senator than a full time Chevy Chase resident who writes great legislation that doesn’t go anywhere.
Six years ago I predicted Markey would have a bigger impact in the Senate than Warren and it turns out I was dead wrong. I don’t even blame Markey for this turn of events, it’s Mitch McConnell’s fault. Markey’s skillset fits for a more convivial era of bipartisanship and has just not adapted to the Twitter and Instagram world we live in today.
SomervilleTom says
@twitter and instagram world:
This might well be true. The issue I have with this argument is that I think the entire American form of government is not consistent with the Twitter and Instagram world we live in today.
Successful government requires more than great speechifying. Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook actively impede the nuanced approach that complex issues require. Mr. Zuckerberg’s refusal to accept his obligations as a publisher, proclaimed yesterday, is very bad news for American democracy.
An ignorant, illiterate, and suffering electorate is both extremely vulnerable to lies knowingly published by Mr. Zuckerberg’s platform and also extremely unlikely to result in effective representative government.
I think it’s very likely that we are, in fact, in the midst of a grassroots revolution — a revolution coming from the extreme right and driven by white supremacists that are heavily armed with military-grade weapons provided by a Russian arms supplier (the NRA).
Politicians who excel at Twitter, Instagram and Facebook may well win next year’s battle. I fear that representative democracy is, as a result, losing the war.
Christopher says
I could not more profoundly disagree with this. As for Twitter and Instagram world – you’ve seen who is “President” right? Is his style really what you want?!