There are two ways of looking at Beto O'Rourke's unsuccessful run for the United States Senate last year. First, he almost won in a state where Democrats haven't been the flavor of the month since Ann Richards was governor two decades ago; Second, he lost to one of the least likable men in Washington. I'm going with the latter.
It cannot be overstated enough just how unpopular Ted Cruz is. In fact, he's despised, and by a majority of his fellow Republicans. That's because Cruz has burned more bridges in his relative short stint in politics than Rommel did in all of World War II. The man once called his own majority leader a liar on the floor of the Senate, then managed to stage a real-live 21 hour filibuster, while reading from that Pulitzer Prize book, "Green Eggs and Ham." The stunt made the rounds of every late-night comedian for at least a month. It wouldn't be a stretch to say that if Cruz were on fire, he have a hard time finding someone willing to pour a bottle of water over him.
So when supporters of Beto point to his near victory in a deep red state as evidence that he would make a good presidential candidate, I would point out that close only counts in horseshoes and grenades; also, Texas, while red, isn't exactly Mississippi or Wyoming. There are parts of it that are purple like Houston and even a few that are blue like Austin. And while it maybe premature to think this state could flip in 2020, it would not shock me one bit if it becomes a tossup state by 2024.
And that means that far from being remarkable, O'Rourke's near miss might just be the result of a demographic shift that's taking place not just in the lone star state, but throughout all of the Southwest. A closer look at the results in Arizona, where Democrat Krysten Sinema defeated Republican Martha McSally, confirm that Republicans may be losing their grip on this part of the country. We haven't seen anything like this since Proposition 187 turned California permanently blue.
But getting back to O'Rourke, my concern here is that potential voters might be seeing something in him that just doesn't exist. He's charismatic, sure, but he's the least substantive candidate running for the nomination. Compare and contrast him to South Bend mayor, Pete Buttigieg, who, unlike O'Rourke, actually won his last election with 80 percent of the vote in a state every bit as red as Texas. Mayor Pete, as he prefers to be called, has a striking command of the issues and comes to the table with practical and workable solutions to many of the problems besetting the country. His town hall on CNN should be a must see for every Democratic voter.
O'Rourke, so far, has acted more like a rock star than a presidential candidate. He kicked off his campaign by announcing he was "born to be in it." And that wasn't the worst thing to come out of Bruce Springsteen's mouth. In an interview in Vanity Fair, O'Rourke he had this to say about his race against Cruz:
"I honestly don't know how much of it was me. There is something abnormal, super normal. I got in there, and I don't know if it's a speech or not, but it felt amazing. Because every word was pulled out of me. Like, by some greater force, which was just the people there. Everything I said, I was, like, watching myself, being like, how am I saying this stuff? Where is this coming from?"All this was enough for late-night comic Seth Meyers to remark, "Seriously, I did not know that weed was legal in Texas." Personally, I was thinking more like Art Carney channeling his inner Captain Video. Can you imagine Barack Obama saying something like that? Neither can I. In fact, as far as I can see, there's very little about O'Rourke that reminds me of Obama, apart from their good looks. The latter was a thoughtful man who was inspiring and inspired others; the former blurts out the first thing that pops into his head and is a non-stop gaffe machine.
What bothers me most about O'Rourke's candidacy is that it's sucking the oxygen out of a crowded room. Candidates like Buttigieg and Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar aren't getting the coverage they deserve because of a flake like O'Rourke. Even now, some pundits are grooming him as a possible running mate for the eventual nominee. Somewhere, Dan Quayle is laughing his ass off.
The 2020 presidential election is just over a year and a half away, and the Democratic field is taking shape right before our eyes. What the party needs to do is to put forth a candidate who can offer the country a vision for the future that is better than Trump's. What it cannot afford to do is indulge a prima donna who believes that he somehow has a pre-ordained right to the presidency.
We already have one space cadet in the White House who thinks he's God's gift to the universe. We don't need another.
Comments