This Isn’t an Electorate; It’s a Lit Match

 

shutterstock_299214437And this cycle keeps getting weirder. From Phillip Rucker at the Washington Post:

Presidential candidates usually don’t run on promises to vacate the White House once they get in office, but that’s what Lawrence Lessig said he might do as he begins exploring a protest bid for the 2016 Democratic nomination.

Lessig, a Harvard law professor and government reform activist, announced Tuesday morning that he was launching a presidential exploratory committee to run as what he called a “referendum president” with the chief purpose of enacting sweeping changes to the nation’s political system and ethics laws.

In the interview, conducted by phone on Monday ahead of his announcement, Lessig said he would serve as president only as long as it takes to pass a package of government reforms and then resign the office and turn the reins over to his vice president. He said he would pick a vice president “who is really, clearly, strongly identified with the ideals of the Democratic Party right now,” offering [Elizabeth] Warren as one possibility. He said Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), whom he considers a friend and has drawn huge crowds in his campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, was another option.

Lessig said he would spend the next month testing the waters to determine whether he would have enough support and resources to wage a credible campaign. If he raises $1 million by Labor Day, he said, he will formally launch his candidacy. If not, he will return the money to donors and go home.

I doubt Lessig changes the Vegas odds, but, given the other news of the day, I’m no longer sure where the outer bounds of American politics are.

Item 1: Bernie Sanders drew a crowd of over 27,000 to the Los Angeles Memorial Sports Arena last night (ever seen an all-Prius traffic jam?).

Item 2: Donald Trump, whom the pundit class has confidently assured us has spent the past week imploding, hasn’t suffered one whit in the polls.

In his new USA Today column, Glenn Reynolds suggests that this is all of a piece:

Trump’s rise is, like that of his Democratic counterpart Bernie Sanders, a sign that a large number of voters don’t feel represented by more mainstream politicians. On many issues, ranging from immigration reform, which many critics view as tantamount to open borders, to bailouts for bankers, the Republican and Democratic establishments agree, while a large number (quite possibly a majority) of Americans across the political spectrum feel otherwise. But when no “respectable” figure will push these views, then less-respectable figures such as Trump or Sanders (a lifelong socialist who once wrote that women dream of gang rape, and that cervical cancer results from too few orgasms) will arise to fill the need.

But Trump and Sanders are just symptoms. The real disease is in the ruling class that takes such important subjects out of political play, in its own interest. As Angelo Codevilla wrote in an influential essay in 2010, today’s ruling class is a monoculture that has little in common with the rest of the nation.

And you don’t have to go the extremes of Sanders and Trump to see this revolt playing out. Last week, Democrats worked themselves into a froth (see what I did there?) over the idea that they might be able to get the CEO of Starbucks to compete for the presidency. On the Republican side, there are big surges right now for a retired neurosurgeon and a former tech CEO, neither of whom have ever held office before. All of which does, I think, reflect an essential loss of faith in government and the professional political class.

Here’s my question: How does this all end up playing out? Because the consensus among the talking heads right now seems to be that the voters just need to scream into a pillow for awhile — but that they’ll eventually come to their senses, nominate a couple of conventional candidates, and find their way back to equilibrium.

While it still strikes me as implausible that the likes of Sanders or Trump will wind up presidential nominees, I’m equally skeptical that this disquiet with business as usual is just going to go away on its own. It feels — perhaps because we’re approaching the end of a decade and a half in which almost every American has hated one if not both of our presidents — as if we’re on the cusp of a major shift in American politics. As for where it points: I confess that there are so many disparate threads here that I haven’t the foggiest idea.

What say you, Ricochet? Is this a passing summer storm? Or is something bigger happening in American politics? And, if the latter, where are we headed?

Published in General, Politics
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 73 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Dan Hanson:

    … So the jury’s out until I see more of her.

    Rubio is great at preparing a canned speech. Very inspiring. But I am not yet sure how much depth is behind the Rhetoric. I want to hear him in a few more ‘hostile’ interviews against smart people who ask penetrating questions before I could say for sure. But he’s definitely the kind of politician we need.

    Walker? Not sure. He didn’t impress me that much in the debate, and I am skeptical that he has the charisma and verbal deftness required to be a real communicator of ideas. He seems like a very good executive, though, and that’s very important.

    Rand Paul is a huge disappointment to me, since I lean Libertarian and very much wanted to support him. And he probably has more credibility with ‘the other side’ than any of the others due to his social liberalism. But he is quick to anger, easy to tie into rhetorical knots (just ask Chris Christie), and his foreign policy notions border on pusillanimous. I think Rand is done, and he’s certainly off my list.

    Cannot “Like” this comment enough. This is exactly my assessment, just better articulated than in my own head.

    Rand Paul’s foreign policy is so naive as to what happens when a US power vacuum is created, it’s disqualifying in my estimation.

    • #61
  2. Z in MT Member
    Z in MT
    @ZinMT

    Dan Hanson: Elon Musk would be a very interesting candidate in 10 years or so.

    Elon Musk cannot be president. He was born in South Africa.

    • #62
  3. Z in MT Member
    Z in MT
    @ZinMT

    It certainly is interesting times. I think Trump’s and Sandar’s popularity is due to the fact that the voters know that they neither is the choice of the ruling class. The populists on both sides are fed up with being told who they have to vote for.

    • #63
  4. Ball Diamond Ball Member
    Ball Diamond Ball
    @BallDiamondBall

    Troy Senik, Ed.: Here’s my question: How does this all end up playing out? Because the consensus among the talking heads right now seems to be that the voters just need to scream into a pillow for awhile — but that they’ll eventually come to their senses, nominate a couple of conventional candidates, and find their way back to equilibrium.

    The talking heads are welcome to scream into a pillow for the rest of their lives.  Ahem.

    Most of the current exemplary company notwithstanding, the chattering class have a cozy symbiosis with the ruling class, and are no more willing to brook real change than those whose nests are more directly feathered by the status quo.  Everybody got mouths to feed.

    I am eligible for some pretty snazzy TSA known-traveller “you’re good” benefits, but I won’t sign up for it.  I’d rather wait in line like a human if that’s as good as humans get than become a member of The Party.

    Real change is coming, one way or another.

    • #64
  5. Ball Diamond Ball Member
    Ball Diamond Ball
    @BallDiamondBall

    I do think that most of the Real Change ™ put into play will be rolled back, as this is the way of things, but it will not be for lack of fight.

    What will be important, and will matter more than any concrete achievement, is the demonstration that the American People recognize the power they have, even if only dimly, and only every once in a while.

    Our own reluctance to admit the tyranny emerging before our very eyes is what the Tyrant banks upon to let it happen.  He is too canny to come at us all at once.  Instead, he keeps us on the march, isolates us and picks us off, one inattentive footslogger at a time.  It’s just over the next hill.  Just a bit further.  Ping!  We will win some and lose some.  Some people will never figure it out.  Some will do so too late.

    Yet this election cycle stands a good chance of producing a positive change, even if it only slows our descent.  Unlike winning little fights about gay this or gun that, the real struggle for the awareness of the population as free men and women who do not have to take this crap from any tin-pot dictator wannabe is worth fighting in and of itself.  Given this, the other things will follow.

    Notice that winning or losing this election or that are almost irrelevant.

    • #65
  6. Dan Hanson Thatcher
    Dan Hanson
    @DanHanson

    Z in MT:

    Dan Hanson: Elon Musk would be a very interesting candidate in 10 years or so.

    Elon Musk cannot be president. He was born in South Africa.

    To quote Rick Perry:  Oops.  I totally forgot that.  Thanks.  One of those other guys might be Canadian, too.  Can’t remember.

    • #66
  7. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Great Ghost of Gödel:It is a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

    Get back to me when either the Democratic or Republican Party shows serious signs of going the way of the Know-Nothings or Whigs. Hell, get back to me when there’s a 5% uptick in registration in any existing American third party.

    Sideshow. Irrelevant. Doesn’t mean a [CoC] thing.

    Unfortunately.

    If we do get a Clinton V Bush election (or the roughly equivalent in terms of candidates) I expect voter turnout to be down *significantly* in November 2016.

    Does that count?

    • #67
  8. Manfred Arcane Inactive
    Manfred Arcane
    @ManfredArcane

    Miffed White Male: If we do get a Clinton V Bush election (or the roughly equivalent in terms of candidates) I expect voter turnout to be down *significantly* in November 2016.   Does that count?

    !*!*!  PUN ALERT  !*!*!

    • #68
  9. Frozen Chosen Inactive
    Frozen Chosen
    @FrozenChosen

    Dan Hanson:I think Mitt Romney could have been viable this time around – especially given how he could have played all those clips of Democrats laughing at all the predictions he made in 2012 – which came true. Being right is a pretty good weapon.

    I like Fiorina, but my ideal candidate would be someone like her, only with a track record for success that is unparalleled. Elon Musk would be a very interesting candidate in 10 years or so. Silicon Valley has quite a few tech leaders who lean at least Libertarian. TJ Rogers, Jeff Bezos,

    We need someone who can capture the imagination of youth. Someone who is part of the future, not the past. Someone who can command attention, and who can make a case for smaller government and more freedom with grace and intelligence.

    Rubio!

    • #69
  10. Ball Diamond Ball Member
    Ball Diamond Ball
    @BallDiamondBall

    Rubio!

    Now that’s funny.

    • #70
  11. Boss Mongo Member
    Boss Mongo
    @BossMongo

    Ball Diamond Ball:

    The talking heads are welcome to scream into a pillow for the rest of their lives. Ahem.

    I hope them posers end up biting the pillow for the rest of their lives; for cause.

    • #71
  12. donald todd Inactive
    donald todd
    @donaldtodd

    Brad2971:2. The last 20-24 years of Politics As Entertainment,as invented by Rush Limbaugh, made profitable by Fox News, and successfully imitated by Jon Stewart, Keith Olbermann, and Bill Maher, has certainly hit the Law of Diminishing Returns wall.

    I guess I am taking issue with the idea that Olbermann was successful.  He is back to doing sports and I never listen to Olbermann on sports, or anything else either.

    • #72
  13. donald todd Inactive
    donald todd
    @donaldtodd

    Frozen Chosen:

    Dan Hanson:I think Mitt Romney could have been viable this time around

    Rubio!

    Rubio maybe.  He is on the list of those I could vote for.

    Romney?  He missed the boat twice, losing to McCain and then to Barry.  He’s not and never has been a conservative.  Great technocrat! Good with making large amounts of money!  Believable as a conservative?  Too many quotes from the past, especially when running for office in Massachusetts.  Unbelievable as a conservative.  Glad he is not trying for the third strike.

    • #73
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.