There’s a movement afoot to ignore Sarah Palin for a week. Would that we could – but it would be much like trying to ignore a squeaky floorboard or a nagging tooth. If she’s not nattering on about Ronnie Raygun or weighing in on Egypt (after having somebody help her find it on the map), she’s trying to trademark her name. (Sheesh. I mean, if your last name is Mxyzptlk, fine, but really...)
Pursuant to my recent post about presidential auctoritas (or lack thereof), I started to wonder which failed vice presidential candidates in recent history have ever garnered so much attention. Then I started to wonder just who those failed v.p. contenders were, since it’s sometimes hard to even remember the successful ones.
Here, then, a list of presidential tickets going back to Ike:
Pursuant to my recent post about presidential auctoritas (or lack thereof), I started to wonder which failed vice presidential candidates in recent history have ever garnered so much attention. Then I started to wonder just who those failed v.p. contenders were, since it’s sometimes hard to even remember the successful ones.
Here, then, a list of presidential tickets going back to Ike:
- 1952: Dwight Eisenhower/Richard Nixon over Adlai Stevenson/John Sparkman
- 1956: Eisenhower/Nixon over Stevenson/Estes Kefauver
- 1960: John Kennedy/Lyndon Johnson over Nixon/Henry Cabot Lodge
- 1964: Johnson/Hubert Humphrey over Barry Goldwater/William Miller
- 1968: Nixon/Spiro Agnew over Humphrey/Edmund Muskie
- 1972: Nixon/Agnew over George McGovern/Sargent Shriver
- 1976: Jimmy Carter/Walter Mondale over Gerald Ford/Bob Dole
- 1980: Ronald Reagan/George H.W. Bush over Carter/Mondale
- 1984: Reagan/Bush over Mondale/Geraldine Ferraro
- 1988: Bush/Dan Quayle over Michael Dukakis/Lloyd Bentsen
- 1992: Bill Clinton/Al Gore over Bush/Quayle
- 1996: Clinton/Gore over Bob Dole/Jack Kemp
- 2000: George W. Bush/Dick Cheney over Gore/Joe Lieberman
- 2004: Bush/Cheney over John Kerry/John Edwards
- 2008: Barack Obama/Joe Biden over John McCain/Sarah Palin
I never would have guessed Sparkman and Kefauver. And it’s only because I was politically aware during my late teens that I remembered Lodge, Miller, and Muskie. But after that it was kind of a blur. Who the hell was Lloyd Bentsen anyway?
But what’s notable is the fact that most of these people simply faded into the woodwork, except for Bob Dole who made another bid for high office after twenty years. And of course John Edwards, who went on to capture other headlines. But no failed v.p. candidate went on to win the presidency since Franklin Roosevelt ran with James Cox against Harding in 1920. Before that, you have to go all the way back to John Tyler, who was v.p. on a regional Whig ticket in 1836 and then succeeded William Henry “We Don’t Need No Steenking Coat” Harrison as president in 1841.
This is not to suggest that Ms. Palin isn’t entitled to exercise her aspirations. Gerry Ferraro remained active in politics, although with her sights set not quite so high; Joe Lieberman stayed in the Senate, although I’m not sure to what purpose; and Dan Quayle of course went on to become a successful potato farmer. The real issue is, just because she was nominated for our second-highest office doesn’t give her opinions any more validity than those of, say, Jack Kemp. What confounds me is that people – and the media – continue to hang on her every word. It’s the same as breaking news about Lindsay Lohan. Is there some reason we should care?
But what’s notable is the fact that most of these people simply faded into the woodwork, except for Bob Dole who made another bid for high office after twenty years. And of course John Edwards, who went on to capture other headlines. But no failed v.p. candidate went on to win the presidency since Franklin Roosevelt ran with James Cox against Harding in 1920. Before that, you have to go all the way back to John Tyler, who was v.p. on a regional Whig ticket in 1836 and then succeeded William Henry “We Don’t Need No Steenking Coat” Harrison as president in 1841.
This is not to suggest that Ms. Palin isn’t entitled to exercise her aspirations. Gerry Ferraro remained active in politics, although with her sights set not quite so high; Joe Lieberman stayed in the Senate, although I’m not sure to what purpose; and Dan Quayle of course went on to become a successful potato farmer. The real issue is, just because she was nominated for our second-highest office doesn’t give her opinions any more validity than those of, say, Jack Kemp. What confounds me is that people – and the media – continue to hang on her every word. It’s the same as breaking news about Lindsay Lohan. Is there some reason we should care?
So continuing that thought, why not ignore Sarah Palin on a regular basis? Except of course for blogs that mention her in order to advocate ignoring her.
And while we’re at it, how about a Palin/Lohan ticket in 2012?
And while we’re at it, how about a Palin/Lohan ticket in 2012?
No comments:
Post a Comment