fearlessly proclaiming the truth & the other truth! voice of the teknoshamanic institute
a ding-dong daddy from deecee
Published on May 22, 2004 By kingbee In Politics
this is a totally subjective opinion and may or may not be correct: all things being equal, more voters will choose a republican over a democrat when voting in an election to fill an executive office.

this is a conclusion based on solely on personal observation but i think its accurate: successful republican candidates for executive positions like us president and governor of california seem to share an unusual common characteristic

it's a relatively recent phenomenon and very much like one of those 3d images that appear to be nothing but rows of multi-colored repetitive patterns until you stand very close to it, let your eyes go out of focus and then step backwards slowly without blinking. it seems to date back to an unusual convergence of life imitating art or vice versa in the mid-1970s.

gerald ford took office in late 1974. saturday night live debuted in fall 1975. a few weeks, maybe a month later, chevy chase became the first member of snl's ensemble cast to emerge as a star in his own right. chase's ticket to fame was an overly exaggerated impersonation of ford stumbling over his own feet. to the best of my knowledge, gerald ford had no previous history of public clumsiness--at least not while being videotaped by news crews. it was just a silly one-time thing until chase mimicked it on national television. then something truly weird happened. ford, who otherwise seemed as presidential as any of his predecessors, began to trip on nothing on a fairly regular basis. chase, who had to have been delighted, kept stumbling with him until ford lost the next election and chevy gained a movie contract..

things went back to normal--sort of--for the next four years. jimma carter who succeeded ford might have served two terms but there always seemed to be something lacking. at the time, i didnt realize what it was.

ronald reagan had no such problem. he capitalized on this elusive je-ne sais quois. george hw bush came by it naturally as well although its manifestation was a bit subtler. when george w bush began to attract national attention in 1999, i finally realized what id been seeing all along, but not been able to grasp.

after nearly 200 years of presidents with boringly presidential personae, american voters--following the lead of staunch republicans--now manifest an affinity for a leader who would be perfectly cast as the obliviously/defiantly moronic father of a sitcom family.

i know. at first consideration, it seems as if im taking a cheap shot. before you dismiss it that way, consider the following: ronald reagan frequently referred to his wife as 'mommy' and often appeared to need her help to interpret relatively simple questions; appeared had nothing to do with formulating answers. nancy clearly fed him responses just like the clever sitcom wife has always done. then there were the naps (a staple of dumb daddom dating back to dagwood bumstead). the ranch chores. those tall tales that merged movie roles with real life. hell, i could have stopped after 'mommy' by merely typing 'bedtime for bonzo'.

george hw bush? think dana carvey for starters. "naw gwa do" is as perfect and idiotically zen as homer simpson's 'doh' bush would have starved if hed had to sell shoes like al bundy...exactly as al bundy starved selling shoes. not convinced? who but a bona fide sitcom dad would have puked in someone's lap at an official state dinner?

just as the boy is the father to the man (or is that "do it once, shame on me; do it twice, shame on ummm me again"?), the current president bush has it down so well he often seems to doing an impersonation of chevy chase doing an impersonation of a caricature of a grinning goofy 'alf' dad. its something he clearly brought with him to the role of a lifetime. one need only glance casually at laura bush to imagine the hilarious hijinks she unleashed upon learning george had managed to get hisself locked up for drinking and driving. he's even managed to father his very own, real life olsen twins.

so where do republican california gubernatorial candidates fit into this? four words: bill simon arnold schwartzenegger. bill simon may have failed twice running for that office, but hes got the right stuff. if i were casting director for an upcoming season of 'full whitehouse' or '8 million is enough', i really couldnt say whether bill or george would get the part. arnold? admittedly hes only done the dumbo daddy in movies but i think we all know whos saving the family from his weekly schemes in real life, dont we?

Comments (Page 2)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on May 23, 2004
>>I seem to recall Michael Dukakis riding around in a tank in full gear during his campaign in 1988.

Frankly I thought Kerry playing hockey was just as ridiculous. One commentator I heard called Kerry on Ice "manly."
on May 23, 2004
smartaz...thanks for the link (i hadnt seen that previously) and for your insightful compliment

i wasnt as clear as i should have been. if kerry were as bla bla bla, bush would have qualified for some kind of record for the most successful carrier landings as well as most regretted publicity stunts involving a war
on May 23, 2004
after the last bla it shoulda said: that commercial would be running so frequently, bush would have etc etc

sorry i lost my head over the insightful rating hahahah
on May 23, 2004
I seem to recall Michael Dukakis riding around in a tank in full gear during his campaign in 1988

an regrettable (altho much more forgettable) decision. i truly cant recall WHY he was tanking around--he was scared of prematurely paroled felons?--but i know it wasnt to pronounce victory at halftime..
on May 25, 2004

was 'that's my bush' (hahaha whatta great title) also animated? i hadnt heard of it previously. call you crazy? nawww insightful seems more appropriate.

Funny... there's a re-run of "that's my Bush" playing on Comedy Central right now... It's incredibly stupid.  I wish that people had more respect for our President, whether they agree with him or not...

on May 25, 2004
hmmmm well thats a drag. it really is a funny title. they shoulda gave the gig to the guys who did b&b
on May 26, 2004
Anybody know the figures on reelections for democrat v. republican canidates? As a sidebar, the only president to serve more than two terms was a democrat.

17 presidents were democrats
18 presidents were republicans

10 democratic presidents served two or more terms
6 republican presidents served two terms

Historically speaking do people prefer Republicans over democrats? Well, it could be said that people prefer their initial impressions of republicans, but once in office prefer democrats. Or, it could be said, quite legitimately since a good number of the people were elected previous to the twentieth century, which is when, more or less, the modern views of the parties solidified, that people prefer the two parties equally well.

If you look at polling data, this conclusion is supported since roughly equal numbers of people say they for sure vote one way or another. Republicans do have a slight edge on party loyalty, but recent trends show that democrats are quite good at picking up the undecided.

What is all this trying to prove?

That it's foolish to say people definitely will vote one way or the other, or that because people like watching TV that people will vote republican. After all, the only reason Nixon lost to Kennedy was because Kennedy looked better on TV.

Cheers
on May 26, 2004
What is all this trying to prove?

while im appreciative that you gave this article such thoughtful consideration and expended the effort to determine the validity of my initial proposition, im concerned i may have been too subtle in its development, possibly misleading you in the process of slouching from sublime to somewhere down the road apiece.

on May 26, 2004
I appreciated the humor, it's just the darn professor in me that strives for historical accuracy.

Cheers
on May 26, 2004
strive on sir. i know you have a decent sense of humor. i was concerned perhaps id lost mine. or that youd immersed yourself a tad too long in mr cooleys uniquely unparallel universe
on May 26, 2004
>> After all, the only reason Nixon lost to Kennedy was because Kennedy looked better on TV.

I've watched that debate several times and I just don't see it. All the descriptions I've read overplay how bad Nixon looked. They seem almost apologetics for why he looked like Quasimodo's illegitimate son. He didn't look that bad. Kennedy didn't look that great. Yes, I know all about the poll where people listening to the radio felt Nixon won while those watching TV felt Kennedy won. I think it's all a bad attempt to explain away that poll and why -- to their surprise -- Kennedy squeaked out a win. A classic example of a wrong explanation that took on a life of its own.

(For the record, had I been alive, I'd have probably voted Kennedy.)
on May 26, 2004
what was the overal video quality like? i cant recall seeing anything but kineoscope but i could be wrong. kineoscope is (thisll kill ya) produced by pointing a videocam at a tv screen. today it might not be as bad but the hardware wasnt that good in 1960. if thats what you saw, they both coulda looked pretty bad

there was a distinct difference. nixon looked scared and shifty jfk and clinton were pretty similar on cam. relaxed, confident, in control.
on May 26, 2004
Nah ..we have Bush

Jess


jess is right, kingbee.

sadly, our prime minister john howard is a funny little man. he looks like a caricature. everything is too big, somehow.

although this alone would be okay with most australians. we prefer our public figures to be hideous-looking. then we can pick on their eyebrows ... and parody them on live tv instead of their policies.

as far as john howard goes, though, he has the added bonus of stupidly cowering behind america as the dual cause of/saviour from australias' ahem "international relations shift". (neat phrase that. he means everyone hates us now).

he is known locally as "the bonsai" (ie: "the little bush").

i understand he also recently referred to another member of parliament as an "absolutely and totally very stupid person".

although, i must conceed that he did have one outstanding success recently when the "make australia a republic" faction again attempted to raise it's weary and battle-scarred head.

he actually pulled off the most brilliant political move ever. as far as australia is concerned anyway.

he merely pointed out to our good citizens that as long as we remain under the wing of the old love in the tiara, we all get a day off work when the old chook has her birthday.

the republicans have nothing on a spare sunday night at the local pub. this is australia, mate. we'd rather take the missus and the sprogs up the coast for a long weekend than have some bloody republic nonsense going on ...

ahem. pardon me.

i am suddenly remembering why it is i am willingly so politically ignorant ... i am going back to la-la land now to write about fairies ... yeah, fairies ! ... and flowers ... and other such nice things ... before i wake up any more ...

great article, king.

mig XX
on May 26, 2004
i had to read that twice to pick up all the nuances...all im likely to comprehend in any event. couldnt yall create some sorta puppet queen and celebrate her birthday anyway? cut out the middlin maam or something? right now she may seem worth her weight in vb but...what happens when his ugliness ascends the throne?

glad you enjoy my silliness
on Jun 15, 2004
bush would probably be better fit in a movie like Wayne's World or Amercian Pie, or Forrest Gump. of course, he wouldnt look too bad on COPS, i could see it now: car driving 70 mph down a highway in Texas, cheney driving, and bush out the window screaming, "i m the president, so fuk u!" while condoleeza rice is in the back with donald rumsfield screaming, "more weed...ouch my teeth hurt".
3 Pages1 2 3