When things are slow in the sports world, the guys (almost all guys) on sports talk debate their “top 5” lists: quarterbacks, all-time basketball greats, etc. Much of the time they talk about people I only vaguely know. I root for the home team – usually – but am not a fantasy junkie. To relieve my frustration, I risk of interrupting the electoral imbroglios and debate deconstructions to get BMGers’ answer to this question:
Who are the 5 politicians currently active, in order, who you believe are best at their craft?
I will not define “politician”; I thought about saying “officeholder” but realized that it would leave out luminaries such as Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton. I’ll leave it as someone working to advance their ideals, whatever they may be, through the elected and political process. Whether you agree with their beliefs or not. Below I’ve put my top 5…who are yours?
#5 Jerry Brown. Americans love comebacks, and his is impressive. Considering that contradictory referendums have rendered California almost ungovernable, he has still managed to softly blow on the embers of a recovery in the Golden State while eviscerating the rump Republican Party. When Democrats needed a supermajority of 3/4 to execute changes to the budget, Brown was a major reason they got it. They elephants have largely given up on winning any statewide office in California. While not above spanking the left if he feels it’s necessary, he retains an impressive favorability despite tough times in California. Impressive second chapter for the man.
#4 Scott Brown. Brown has no business threatening to win election to the Senate in New Hampshire. But he had no business succeeding Ted Kennedy. Frankly, lotsa folks will tell you he had no business succeeded Cheryl Jacques as State Senator. Aside from being run over by a rising star who would have beaten almost anyone, Brown has repeatedly won election in situations where little would point to any hope. This is the mark of a good politician — getting the best of any situation, and going beyond where any reason says he should. A Massachusetts carpetbagger laughed out of his last job is now neck-and-neck with a longtime governor in an indigo state.
#3 Rand Paul. He has collected some admiration on the left to go with burgeoning support on the right. One of the few mainstream figures who is articulating a point of view that seems to stand on its feet, rather than parroting poll numbers. While too far outside the Republican mainstream to become a likely presidential candidate, Paul is a national figure who fosters intense loyalty from a certain voter. If he ever converts his ideas into a more coherent set not anathema to modern Republicanism and softens issues on social positions, he would present a formidable challenge.
#2 Marine Le Pen. The de facto opposition leader of France has done what Paul can only dream of. She has taken the right wing movement bequeathed from her father and transformed it from a home of crazies and anti-Semites to a home of the disaffected and disenfranchised. In modern Europe, that is a lot of people. While there is no doubting the nativist, xenophobic underpinning of many of her followers, Le Pen has become the anti-Europe, anti-elite voice in France. With the mainstream right fractured and the left bereft of credibility (current French Socialist president Francois Hollande has an 11% approval rating), she is currently breaking through. One poll found that if an election for president were held between the Hollande and Le Pen, she would win. Most successful political makeover in 21st Western political history, I would say.
#1 Angela Merkel. Merkel isn’t just better than the opposition, she has more or less foreclosed upon it, entirely through democratic means. There is no opposition in Germany to speak of. During the most recent electoral campaign, the only question was who would join the Chancellor of Europe in government. Even her hand gesture, the Merkel Rhombus, is well known in a country which sees no other officeholder as able to do her job. People who loathe her ideas admit that she and she alone deserves the job; Merkel has no credible alternative at home, dictates European financial policy, and runs the largest economy on the continent. Her viewpoint is so dominant that there is little visible distance between the center-right party she leads, and the center-left party in government with her. The right-wing party shriveled up and died as followers preferred to creep left with Merkel rather than stay where they were. She has economic and foreign policy credibility at home. Merkel isn’t just the best politician in Germany; on many days she seems to be the only one.
Saving the best to last:
#5: Barack Obama: I might be the only person here on BMG who still admires the President.
#4: Michelle Nunn—Just watch her. She is actually going to win in Georgia, which will be a huge accomplishment for a democratic victory in that southern state.
#3: Ruth Bader Ginsburg–She’s my favorite Supreme Court Justice. And, unfortunately, our justices are now politicians.
#2: Nancy Pelosi–An extraordinary retail politician who somehow remembers everybody’s name.
#1: Elizabeth Warren–She is the best!
So, there you have it. Barack and four ladies! Our future leaders are women.
RBG is a fantastic justice, but not sure about a politician. Despite the obvious truths of her recent statements that Obama couldn’t appoint someone as good as her, the Republicans definitely can and will (given the chance) appoint someone horrible. If a Dem doesn’t take the WH in 2016, would could be proper effed.
The SJC just isn’t as public about that.
I agree that she should retire to preserve her seat for a liberal. I only half agree that we couldn’t find someone as good as her to replace her — Sonia Sotomayor has been a kick-butt presence on the court and very much a liberal, so there’s no reason to think the President couldn’t find someone almost as good as Ginsberg, even if he or she would be unlikely to be quite as good as Ginsberg.
I was just noting that she’s denying some political realities.
I think that he could definitely find someone as good as her. Not sure he could get that person confirmed, though. I don’t trust him to go to the mat for a great justice, even if there are many out there to choose from.
but the Supreme Court is also difficult for Republicans to play their typical games on — because it could be incredibly damaging for them.
Note that Obama got Kagan and Sotomayor through.
Someone similarly liberal to either would be fine as a replacement — Sotomayor in particular I think has been a strong, vocal liberal on the court, much more so than anyone would have suspected when she was first nominated. I see no reason why Obama couldn’t pull another Sotomayor out of the hat.
1) It’s sorta sexist
Breyer is a few years younger but has gotten involved in more health scares than RBG *
2) Its ageist
John Paul Stephens was 91 and still making good opinions when he quit, and he already has publicly regretted retiring as soon as he did. Douglas was a capable justice in spite of Gerald Fords attempts to get him impeached.
3) Its politically stupid
This Senate as presently composed, let alone if it is run by Mitch McConnell, will not give Obama a progressive nominee. We had Lindsey Graham backing Kagan and Sotomayor-he won’t for the next one. Lugar is gone, Collins has moved to the right, the kind of Republicans that were even handed on justices either are out of office or not in a political position to do the right thing. McCain will oppose since he is running in 2016 for re-election, as are all the potential presidential candidates so no good will from them either. Gives Ted and Rand a great filibuster opportunity to score points with the base.
Plus its Obama. We already know he will pick a bland centrist white male like Merrick Garland , according to some insiders his preferred choice for the bench. He already nominated two female liberals, he isn’t running for re-election, and he has every incentive to avoid the fight. The GOP will still fight it, and Garland is the best we do if RBG retires or dies before the end of Obama. Not the kind of justice worthy of replacing her.
If we wait until 2016 we get a far more favorable Democratic Senate majority due to the cycle of seats that are up and huge coattails for the first female President. You honestly think Hillary, in her honeymoon period, won’t have an easier time replacing her husbands first appointee to the bench? Particularly getting a liberal female replacement? Whether she gets a Dem Senate or not, she will have a way easier time in 2016 than Obama will have as a lameduck now.
1) He’s five years younger and I don’t think a broken arm from an accident is in the same category as colon cancer and pancreatic cancer in terms of “health scares.”
On that note, Breyer can go, too.
2) The risk still increases greatly, regardless of a few exceptions.
3) Hoping for a stronger Democratic majority and a Democratic president is a pretty great risk. The next president could be replacing RBG, Kennedy, Scalia, and Breyer. If the politics fall the other way, what will happen to the court then?
I honestly think she won’t be president.
… I would much rather see Hillary Clinton on the Supreme Court than in the Oval Office. I think she can be freer and more effective. Devastatingly so.
He could barely function. Justice Brennan retired at 84 with a Republican president in office because he’d promised never to hang on like Douglas did. Stevens may be fine at 94 but that’s a rare exception. I’d not put money on Ginsburg being able to serve at 91, which she would be in the last year of a two-term Obama successor. If a Republican wins in 2016 it’s game over for that court for a good 20 years. Gotta make it an issue in 2016.
From the always excellent fivethirtyeight, here’s some data explaining why.
I would put Elizabeth Warren in my top 5, probably number 1. Jerry Brown, as Sabutai, says is great for what he’s accomplished. If we’re including bad guys, I’d put Vladimir Putin on the list.
But I’m game.
1. Barack Obama. Still the best at retail politics, and engaging audiences. Not always the best at dealing the GOP, but accomplished nonetheless.
2. Bill Clinton. He drives me nuts at times, but he’s still a master of taking over any discussion.
3. John McCain. We can make fun of Meet the Press for having him on every week, but it does take skill to keep the media’s attention. If you compare McCain to his allies Lindsay Graham and Kelly Ayotte, you see how good he is.
4. Joe Biden. The guy just handed Leon Panetta his head on a plate, and smiled the whole time.
5. Dick Durbin. One of the smart guys in the Senate. (A case could be made for Carl Levin too.)
I miss Ted Kennedy … the Senate misses him even more.
5. Rand Paul – for the reasons above. Also, he, like his old man, is causing meaningful change in the Republican party. From roots of being a niche politician, he is becoming mainstream and will be formidable in a presidential run.
4. Hillary Clinton – From first lady to ineffectual Senator to ineffectual Secretary of State to “the one to beat” for president certainly says something.
3. President Erdogan – Bringing Turkey into a position for EU membership, maintaining order in a disordered part of the world. His shrewd actions in the current crisis are going to put him in a position to make incredible demands of the west for Turkey’s intervention. It’s a bold move, Cotton. Let’s see how it plays out.
2. Barack Obama – hold a Nobel peace price, yet utilizes Drone Warfare much to the dismay of innocent bystanders. Sorry, Kids! Massively influential despite low approval ratings. Young enough that post-presidency, can assume a Congressional seat at a whim if he chooses. Certainly not the worst president we’ve had, but set into motion events with farther long-term consequences than some of his predecessors.
1. Pope Francis – How many Catholics came out of the closet when they saw their Pontiff actually attempting to manifest the humility of Christ? The slow-moving church, with a Curia that would look conservative in 1794, has in the hearts of many moved farther forward in a year than it did under much of JP2 and Benedict. His influence may see the church shaking its pillars in the realm of Divorce and marriage. This man is as 2014 as a Pope can get. He will continue to grow in influence.
I will echo sabutai on Merkel, Jerry Brown, and Le Pen. And everyone on Warren. If Scott Brown pulls off the upset up north, he has to enter that list as well. I also agree with Pope Francis and Joe Biden on this list as well. I will add some of my own, some of whom have stepped out of public life but (I hope) may be re-entering it.
5) Gordon Brown
His masterful speech in the run-up to the Scottish independence referendum may have been the speech that saved the union. Additionally, he took the politically painful decisions to save Britain’s-and thus Europe’s and our own-economy and paid the price for it. In hindsight, most voters would likely return him to government over the compassionless and hapless Cameron. He also is a wise elder statesmen on foreign relations, he is still a backbenching MP and has downplayed rumors of a comeback for now, but with Labor polling far away from the Tories on a generic ballot but running even on ‘which PM do you want?’, because of the lackluster Milliband he may have a shot at redemption in some capacity.
4) Mitt Romney
You have to admire that the man has lived about nine political lives. The liberal Republican who ‘was an independent during Reagan-Bush’ and who was going to ‘be better on gay rights and choice than Ted Kennedy’ morphed into the socially moderate Republican gubernatorial candidate and than tacked to the far right of his party in 2008 and 2012. He is now viewed as an elder statesmen and the adult in the room, would easily defeat President Obama is the election were held tomorrow, and is being increasingly talked up as a potential 2016 candidate. Certainly not someone I want to see back in the public eye, but a masterful second (or third?) public life for someone written off many times before. Compare where he is now to where Gore is at the moment, and you can see why the admiration for his skill is prescient.
3) Russ Finegold
On the opposite end of the spectrum than Mitt Romney, has any other Senator been so foresighted in making a politically tough but enormously consequential vote of dissent than Finegold voting against the Patriot Act? The only one who may come close is Barbara Lee voting against the original AUMF. Finegold also had the good sense to vote against Tim Geithner instead of giving liberal cover to Wall Street cronyism which Obama has done again and again. He took that vote early, during a tough re-election battle, and against a President he was an early admirer and endorser of. Very tough call, and the right one. Hopefully he is either back in the Senate or running for President against Hillary. Either way I will have his back.
2) Jim Webb
A Webb presidential run is the closest thing next cycle will have to an interesting an unexpected storyline, a true honest to goodness war hero, and a maverick politician who bucks his party and the Washington consensus at every turn. It has the makings of another McCain 2000, with the exception that Webb is the genuine article and not the literary invention of Mark Salter. Unlike McCain, Webb by himself is a great writer and thinker who has written countless fictional and non-fictional books that are always entertaining and enlightening, even when making points you disagree with. He has always been a consistent Jacksonian Democrat, very populist on economics, very skeptical of humanitarian interventions and domino theories as a substitute for a total strategic commitment and vision and very skeptical of the collusion between big government and big business. A little more conservative on guns and immigration than I’d like, a little too apologetic about Reagan and the South, and probably a man with a small constituency in 2016-but I am hoping he gets in and think he offers the clearest shot across Hillary’s bow.
1) Hillary Rodham Clinton
Never before has a potential President had such a swift, easy, and uncomplicated pathway to the Presidency. Everything is set up marvelously for her to take advantage and finally land the prize she has sought her whole life. Make no mistake, whether America is ready or not, she is clearly ready and she will be the most formidable candidate for President our party has seen. She has a clear choice. Should she play it safe and ride the recent high approval ratings, recird dissatisfaction with Obama’s amateurism on foreign affairs and the economy, matched with total rejection of the extremism of the right? Or should she take the risk and become the kind of Roosevelt-Johnson figure that proud young McGovernite at Wellesley speaking truth to power wanted to be when she grew up? One path easily puts her in the White House, the other is a riskier path that would put her on Mt. Rushmore. This is the real hard choice she has to make now. Our party and country await the answer, which is why she has to be #1 on any list.
Can’t really agree on the others though… Don’t know enough about Erdogan to comment, but it’s a key, key position in the region at this time…
So far his successes have been largely with the wider public, the key thing now is getting the Bishops on board with his agenda for reform. He all but endorsed the gradualism approach that would allow the Church to maintain it’s dogma on key sexual issues while also significantly downplaying the dogmas day to day effect on practicing Catholics and the institution. A small change in theory but a game changer in practice. The next few weeks will tell.
He has defanged the Turkish military politically, chased out his only plausible rivals (one to America, one to powerlessness), and is steadily imposing a mildly Islamist view on a proudly secular Turkey. I don’t agree with what he’s doing, but he’s doing a good job of it.
…when his opponent last time started talking about how CA had gone downhill and how it was such a great state when she moved there 30 years before. Jerry Brown naturally ran ads reminding voters that HE was Governor 30 years before. I’m amazed that nobody on his opponent’s campaign thought of that!
His opponent called him a “has been”. So, Jerry said that he is indeed a “has been” and that’s exactly what California needs—someone who has been successful before.
I was volunteering for the 2004 Boston convention as a teenager and struck up a great conversation with an elderly couple who were also volunteers who flew in from Berkeley. They were surprised I knew about Reagan’s past history as an abortion rights supporter, that Nixon lost to Edmund G. Brown, and of course, who Jerry Brown was.
And not five minutes later we were walking past a hotel on Tremont and out popped Jerry Brown, who was only mayor of Oakland at that point. He came up to us to thank us for volunteering, and approached the couple and remembered exactly who they were, when they worked for him in the past on other campaigns, and they chatted at length about his ideas and the 2004 race. “I’ll need your support outside of Oakland in the near future” he remarked to them, who knew he’d have come back this much?
sound contemporary, except for the suede denim secret police
The Dead Kennedy’s are the main reason by apolitical roommate remembered Jerry Brown.
or does she have to be limited to just the top spot?
I see lots of Warren fanning here. Great. I like her, too.
If she gets some points on beating Scott Brown in an election, I can deal with that — thought it was friendly territory at a friendly time. She’s good at getting on tv, also. But what has she done that makes her the best politician in the world? How does she best Erdogan, Harper, or Merkel, who have dominated the top of their national polities for years? Warren is the face of the America I want to live in, but until that goes somewhere, she isn’t world-elite in my book.
Rankings are invidious in sports and the arts, because they necessarily conflate things that are completely different. Which is better: Peyton Manning or Bart Starr? Pedro Martinez or Walter Johnson? Which is better: The Maltese Falcon or Mystic River? Apocalypse Now or Duck Soup?
Still, it’s fun to play. Here’s some heresy.
5: Kate Donaghue: published of MA Dem Dispatch. Sports radio callers focus on the glamor positions like quarterback, but that’s not where stuff gets done.
4: Don Berwick: in the avalanche of retail politics that began with Brown-Warren, the best candidate at talking about issues that matter, the fastest on his feet, and the best listener. Runner up: Katherine Clark (MA-5), who has the unusual gift of focus and attention. Second runner up: Mike Lake’s mom.
3: Markos Moulitsas, Daily Kos: the premier progressive site and the center of an ecosystem of activism, fund-raising, and advocacy that is redefining retail politics in the new century. Runner up: Lauren Miller, Elizabeth Warren’s digital director. Second runner up: Josh Marshall, Talking Points Memo, has redefined advocacy and journalism.
2: Jimmy Carter: definitive disproof that there are no second acts in American life. Has any president since John Quincy Adams made a greater contribution after leaving office?
1: Barack Obama: for all our vexations and frustrations, I suspect his presidency may eventually seem more influential than seems likely today. I would not be surprised to see Hillary Clinton take office and enact the transformative legislation Obama could not pass and for which a generation has worked: compare LBJ and Civil Rights.
better-liked than he is now. ACA will go down in history.
But I think he’s a lousy politician. He was and is the anti-Bush. He’s performed adequately as President, particularly given the political climate, but as a politician, he is very lacking.
Politically, though not necessarily on policy, he failed on Syria. He got ACA done, but failed to promote it to the detriment of the truth and Democratic candidates now and in 2010. He failed on the budget sequestration gambit with the Republicans. I don’t know if he screwed up politically with the Simpson-Bowles committee, but I think he did. It provided him with a lot of negative press, again to the detriment to the truth and the distraction from important issues.
I think our Governor is a better politician, though not as capable an administrator.
Kate is a great resource for our state sorry. And Clark has shown herself to be one of the rising stars in our delegation in a short amount of time. I expect big things from her, and I was a skeptic during the primary-now I see that the hype and easy victory were more than well earned.
On Sabutais list: Agree, wholeheartedly with Jerry Brown and with Angela Merkel. And well stated, Sabutai. However… Le Pen and Rand Paul? I can’t see it. Largely a brew of circumstance and the reflective sheen of having tin-pot dictators for fathers: There may be ‘craft’ involved in exploiting that, but I will not call it politics. On Scott Brown… He has yet to truly close the deal, as far as I’m concerned. It seems he’s perpetually running and has perfected the craft of ‘candidate’ but, to date, has been unable to translate to useful action.
On my list: it is, with one exception, a mix of admiration, acumen and accomplishments and not (strictly) based upon outcomes, as Sabutai’s list seems to be.
Aung San Suu Kyi: As Burma/Myanmar transitions to a democracy Aung San Suu Kyi has ‘entered’ politics after a long protest and struggle with the former millitary leadership. When faced with a perfect storm of anger and expectations over clashes between Buddhists and ethnic Muslims (Rohingya) that any lesser politicion would have exploited to a fare-the-well, she pointedly refused to take sides, citing violence on both sides. The Rohingya are the minority and face great oppression… in fact the situation is not unlike the Hindu and Muslilm fighting that marked the post-British India and her response, in keeping with her beliefs, is not unlike the response of M. K. Gandhi. She’s going to run in 2015 for the presidency of Myanmar and she has gathered all the political gravity to her. Her ‘craft’ is not horse-trading or image based, it’s patience and bravery.
John Kerry: A stolid and steady player in US politics since his days protesting the Viet Nam war. A lot of men are politicians because they need to others to vote for them in order to validate their existence: some insecurity about themselves drives them and can be used to manipulate them. John Kerry is completely different in this regard: there is not an insecure bone in his body. This is how he can run it at such a level for so many years. And it has been on a very high level for a very long time.
Deval Patrick: I think, hands down, Deval Patrick is the smartest person in US politics right now. And yes, I’m putting him well past Barack Obama and Elizabeth Warren in this regard, which I know will upset some here. He radiates raw intelligence and yet unlike raging intellects like Barney Frank or Bill Clinton, there’s a sober, character-based, discipline to him. If he wants to be president he will be… but I get the sense that he won’t want to be president unless he can be a good and impactful one unlike Barack Obama (not Obamas fault…). Patricks tenure as Gov wasn’t perfect and I like to be charitable and think that perhaps casinos were a feint to deke out the Mass legislature that took on a life of its own…
Joe Biden: This one actually surprised me. I started making the list and *bink* the name “Joe Biden” popped, unbidden, into my head. So unless he’s using the Biden mind trick on me all the way from DC, there’s gotta be something to it. I think, much like John Kerry, he’s been at the highest levels of political action for so long and so effectively that the image of him as lovable, back-slappy doofus is mostly jealousy and ill-will coming from those who can’t compete with him.
Benjamin Netanyahu: some volcanos aren’t as volcanic, fiery and ever-shifting as are the politics of the State of Israel. I do not admire the man but I have to give props for his ability to stay on top of such seeming chaos.
Anyways, that’s my list. Ask me tomorrow and you might get a completely different list.
I think Rand and Marine have done a good job inheriting fringe movements their fathers created and moving them more towards the mainstream, but with Scott its too soon to tell. If he pulls the upset in NH he deserves a spot on this kind of list, the only one besides Sam Houston and Daniel Webster to get elected in two different states, and only one since the 17th amendment was ratified and we had direct elections. Impressive, even if you think he’s a stuffed shirt in a prop trunk.
As for your list I am surprised it took so long for Aung San Suu Kyi and John Kerry to end up there. Kerry has been the only bright light in this second terms foreign policy, and has been ahead of the administration on containing Syria, promoting a final agreement for Palestine, and a host of other important issues.
The Biden love has got me thinking, does he have a shot in 2016? I still don’t see his constituency, but he is definitely someone who has been underestimated consistently and actually is a great political thinker ahead of the curve on some respects (marriage equality the most notable).
A bit of a disappointing figure, especially if casinos get enacted, and someone whose rise and fall parallels Obama’s quite nicely-which keeps him out of the presidential conversation. If bridgegate is enough to sink Christie, surely the inevitable indictments against officials at the DCF and Mass Gaming Commission will stink up Deval’s chances.
Biden is a good example. He has done very well, despite some significant setbacks. He’s very well admired. And Netanyahu is an excellent call. In some ways he is reminiscent of Merkel to me – he pretty much owns legitimate political discourse in his country (though kind of got there by default once Sharon fell ill).
As much as I admire Suu Kyi, and a remarkable woman she is, when she is elected prime minister of Burma I will put her in top 5. She is a courageous freedom fighter, and there is one interesting story I hope will some day be told about her relationship with Thien Sein. But until she manages what Havel and Walesa did, she remains an aspirant according to my admittedly tough measure.
Bill Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, Al Franken, Barney Frank, Tammy Duckworth.
Proud to have campaigned with her in 2006. A progressive warrior in every way.
Here is a different list of the most aggravating:
#5: Kim Jong Un–North Korea. He doesn’t care about world opinion, and it’s frightening that he is nuclear power. Fortunately, he seems to have disappeared recently.
#4: Ayatollah Ali Khameni–Supreme Leader of Iran. Becoming a nuclear power will further destabilize an already volatile region.
#3: Vladimir Putin–Outrageous annexation of Crimea.
#2: Bashar al Assad–President of Syria and a mass murderer who has used chemical weapons. Currently presiding over a civil war that’s killed nearly 200,000 people and displaced over a million people.
#1: Ed Markey–Junior Senator of Mass.–Sent multiple fundraising emails that aggravated David.
So, that’s my infamous five.
Dictators don’t need to be effective politicians to get their way. That’s the whole point of being a dictator.
And in regards to Ed Markey – he’s about 2 steps away from getting voted out of office. The Republican Tea Party takeover is a huge threat to his seat. But if you just donate $5 right now – and he hates having to ask you every day – you can stop that from happening.
They don’t have to go about it in the same way, but they definitely have to be politicians if they don’t want to find themselves on the wrong end of a coup. A dictator is only as strong as his henchmen who are willing to do his dirty work. Following Machiavelli’s advice is no doubt a political skill.