Republicans want to talk the real issues?

Posted by noonante on April 29, 2012
Posted in: Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , . Leave a Comment

If there is any agreement among the polarized factions in the current political spectrum, it is that this year’s crop of Republican candidates for the Presidency is one of the weakest in years.  That Mitt Romney could not immediately dispatch the likes of Herman Cain, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich leads one to question his strength in the general election.  Whatever you think of Barack Obama, he has demonstrated that he is one tough, savvy politician.  GOP characterizations of him as a “Chicago politician” would only seem to underscore that point.

So we should expect that the eventual GOP nominee is going to deal with an opponent who will not favor colonizing the moon, banning contraception or being able to identify agencies of the United States government or countries where American service people are involved.  It is becoming apparent that any effort by the President to raise an issue will be met by the rote response that it is not a “real issue,” an argument that may not be that far removed from the efforts to suggest that Obama is not a “real American.”  Here are some of the issues that are not “real:”

  • Rights of women:  If memory serves (and it often does not), when the “Tea Party Congress” came to office in 2011, one of their main issues was limiting the right of women to choose an abortion.  While they had not campaigned on this, preferring instead (and inconsistently) to focus on too much “big government,” abortion rights became a major matter.  We have since seen a flurry of activity on this, including the repulsively intrusive requirement that women undergo vaginal ultrasounds before exercising a Constitutionally-protected right to terminate a pregnancy.  Then there was the flap over whether an employer (not just those affiliated with a religious institution) could prevent insurance carriers from covering contraceptive services, which 98 per cent of American women of child-bearing age have received.  What was the GOP response?  John McCain, as quoted by Irin Carmom in Salon, said this “distract[s] citizens from real issues that really matter.”  Upset about vaginal intrusions?  Romney backer Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett of Pennsylvania advised women to “close your eyes.”  (From Evan McMorris-Santoro in Talking Points Memo.)
  • Fairness of tax code:  While there may be universal agreement on the need to change our tax code, there are sharp differences between the parties on the best way to do that.  The President has proposed the “Buffet rule” that would ensure that millionaires pay at least as much as middle-income tax payers now do.  When confronted on PBS’ NewsHour with the statistic that the top 400 earners in America pay an average rate of 18%  –  less than many middle-income earners  –  Republican strategist Douglas Holtz-Eakin who was a top adviser to George W. Bush and the McCain campaign  –  decried the “pointless battle about fairness.”  And let us not forget Mitt Romney’s statement that the growing inequality among Americans is a matter best discussed in “quiet rooms.”
  • Interest rates on college loans:  I found it remarkable when I learned that the total indebtedness on college loans now exceeds that of credit card obligations.  It is well-established that the unemployment rate for recent college grads exceeds that of the population in general, so the notion that interest rates would double on July 1 would seem to warrant some discussion.  Not to House Speaker John Boehner who referred to the President’s speeches at college campuses last week as a “fake fight,” ”pathetic” and “beneath the dignity of the White House.”  Speaking to voters on an issue that affects them is “beneath the dignity” of the President?  Perhaps he shares Romney’s concern that such matters only be discussed in the “quiet rooms” frequented by Republican donors.

There is, of course, a raft of nonsense that passes for political discourse in our country.  While selection of Romney’s choice for the Vice-Presidency is a significant matter  –  just look at the last two Republican nominees  –  there is no news about it, just pointless speculation.  That beats, however, the complete foolishness about who will be the parties’ nominees in 2016.  Chris Matthews was positively giddy in raising the possibility that Hilary Clinton would face off with Rick Santorum.  All of this is much easier than an informed, fact-based discussion of real issues, even those Republicans would like to ignore because they are inconvenient.

Which Mitt will it be?

Posted by noonante on April 26, 2012
Posted in: Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: . Leave a Comment

Since the general election campaign began several weeks ago following Rick Santorum’s concession to reality, the speculation has been rife over what face Mitt Romney will wear.  The answer to that question is as simple as it is obvious:  whatever it takes for him to win.

A more interesting inquiry is how the Obama campaign will seek to portray him, with there being two camps within the reelection effort.  One view is that Romney should be portrayed as an endless flip-flopper who can be expected to shake the Etch A Sketch in order to appeal to an electorate not as ideologically right-wing as the Tea Party Republicans.  The other view, championed by Bill Clinton, is to put Romney in a corner surrounded by the right-wing rhetoric from the Republican primaries.  It is interesting that Clinton, who was borderline nasty during the 2008 Democratic primaries, has emerged as Obama’s most effective surrogate and perhaps even his most valued adviser.

Romney has already started walking away from his primary positions.  After being the most strident GOP voice on immigration during the debates, he now thinks that Marco Rubio’s version of the DREAM Act is worth looking at.  When the President took to college campuses to speak out against increasing the interest rate on student loans, Romney agreed quickly even though he was opposed to such notions earlier this year.  Romney did not mention how the government should make up the $6 billion annual expense of keeping the interest rates at their current level, but we know from prior statements it will not be from increasing tax revenue or cutting defense spending.  When he does mention cutting specific programs, it has always been from small-bore items such as the National Endowment for the Arts and, of course, Planned Parenthood.

The Silly Season is upon us

Posted by noonante on April 18, 2012
Posted in: Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , . Leave a Comment

While there are those benighted souls who think the ensuing general election campaign will be about issues such as economic policy or foreign affairs, the real campaign began last week with Hilary Rosen’s comment that Ann Romney “never worked a day in her life.”  The Romney campaign, true to its long standing policy of never letting reality get in the way of an opportune political shot, erroneously described Rosen as a Obama “advisor,” and attempted to ratchet up the debate by saying it was Obama, not the Republican Party, that had launched the real “war on women.”  Let’s set aside for a minute whether an ill-advised comment by a previously unknown Democrat is equivalent to a potential Romney Vice-Presidential candidate being in favor of mandating vaginal probes prior to a woman exercising a constitutionally protected right to an abortion, Ann Romney’s lack of work outside her home is not one of our nation’s most pressing problems.

This week brings us the next great issue.  The Daily Caller, a right-leaning site revealed the startling information that Barack Obama has eaten dog.  This revelation, jumped on with considerable gusto by the Romney campaign, is intended to deflect criticism of the Republican nominee-to-be’s driving from Boston to Canada with the family dog riding on the roof of the car.  What’s the source for this scoop?  Uhh … actually it is Obama’s book Dreams from My Father in which he described living in Indonesia as a child.  Again, setting aside the inanity of this factoid as newsworthy, why is the Romney campaign reminding (or informing) people of one of the true embarrassments from their candidate’s personal life?  Unless you are a reader of Gail Collins’ column, this is a topic you may never have encountered. And how does a meal of a child living in a foreign country equate with the actions of an adult engaging in behavior that borders on animal abuse?

Stay tuned for next week’s dramatic news story.

Derby preps wrap-up

Posted by noonante on April 10, 2012
Posted in: Horse Racing. Tagged: . Leave a Comment

With the Kentucky Derby less than four weeks away, the recent round of prep races has done little to clarify a decidedly murky picture.  Only two major preps remain:  next weekend’s Arkansas Derby and the Blue Grass Stakes.  Although I have opined that the Blue Grass should no longer be considered a major prep, it has attracted Hansen, winner of the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile.  To add to the confusion, two horses that had been well-regarded before their last prep races, Mark Valeski and El Padrino, are not on the top 20 list of graded stakes earnings that will determine entry into the field if the race is oversubscribed as it undoubtedly will be.

Union Rags has long been regarded as a top contender with a record that was only a head away from being a perfect 5-for-5, the only defeat being after a difficult trip in the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile.  He had another less-than-desirable journey in the Florida Derby in running third behind Take Charge Indy and the unheralded Reveron.  If you cannot overcome difficulty in an eight horse field, how are you going to deal with the chaos that so often ensues in the 20-horse field that is the Kentucky Derby?  Add to that the fact that his Beyer top of 95 was first run in August at Saratoga (matched by the same number in the Fountain of Youth), and there are several reasons to not regard this guy as the favorite.  Take Charge Indy‘s winning figure of 95 is a tick below his career top, and he has a jockey named Calvin H. Borel as his expected rider in Louisville.  The second and fourth finishers, Reveron and  El Padrino, may also being going to Churchill Downs but will have to wait for horses above them on the graded stakes earnings list to not enter, since they are 24 and 23 on that list respectively.

The UAE Derby was run the same day as the Florida event, and produced the highest speed figure run by any Derby hopeful.  Daddy Long Legs earned a Racing Post Rating of 117 which, by my calculation, is the equivalent of a 105 Beyer.  Despite this win, he is unlikely to be viewed as a leading Derby contender since the Dubai race, now run on a synthetic surface, has never produced a top Derby finisher.  More to the point, in the colt’s only dirt race, he finished 12th by almost 20 lengths in last year’s Juvenile at Churchill Downs.

On the following day, Hero of Order upset the Louisiana Derby at odds of 109-1, beating the well-regarded Mark Valeski who finished second.  It was not, however, as much of an upset as it appeared.  Yes, the winner had a career record of only one win and one second in 13 career starts, but his Beyer top of 87 in the Risen Star stakes fit in with this largely mediocre group.  Mark Valeski had earned a 98 in the Risen Star, beating the fourth-place finisher Hero of Order by six lengths, but that race looks like a negative key race given that the winner, El Padrino, showed nothing in the Florida Derby.  The winning Louisiana Derby Beyer of 90 suggests that the Kentucky Derby winner will not be coming out of this group.

Last weekend we saw the Wood Memorial, Santa Anita Derby and the Illinois Derby.  The mid-Western race is only considered a prep because the winner came back and won at Churchill in 2002.  Other than that, I think the race has a record similar to that of the UAE Derby.  This year’s version was won by Done Talking, a colt who finished 20 lengths behind Hansen in the Remsen.  His winning Beyer of 86 was better than the last race Beyer of any entrant save one, and is unlikely to produce much of a bandwagon going to Louisville.

The other two races were unique in this season of preps in that the top two choices in each race ran to form, producing exciting finishes.  The still undefeated Gemologist held off Godolphin’s Alpha in winning Aqueduct’s Wood Memorial.  His winning Beyer of 98 is near the top for this year’s final prep races.  At Santa Anita, I’ll Have Another, a 43-1 winner in his prior start, held off Creative Cause, the winner of three graded stakes and third-place finisher in the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile.  The winning Beyer of 94 was below the figs run by this pair in their last outing.

Random thoughts

Posted by noonante on March 30, 2012
Posted in: Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment

How does the killing of a 17-year old become a partisan issue?  I have thought for some time that the hyper-partisanship that infects our nation’s politics is the biggest problem facing our country, and I am not exempting either the Democrats or the Republicans from this assessment.  As I understand the Trayvon Martin killing, the following facts are not in dispute:

  • Trayvon Martin was not armed
  • Trayvon’s killer, George Zimmerman, telephoned the police to report that Trayvon was a suspicious person
  • Zimmerman did not inform the police that Martin was engaged in illegal behavior
  • The 911 operator directed Zimmerman to not follow Martin
  • Zimmerman continued to follow Trayvon
  • Zimmerman killed Martin with a handgun that he was licensed to carry
  • Zimmerman claims that Martin surprised him by jumping out from a concealed location and assaulted him

So what we have is someone being followed at night and, if we accept Zimmerman’s explanation, assaulting his follower.  Florida has a “Stand Your Ground” law which does not require, as many states do, that if someone feels threatened they must retreat if they can do so safely.  Rather, they are permitted to use force. Again, accepting Zimmerman’s account, is that not what Trayvon Martin was doing?

Has Florida become a state where it is permissible to provoke a confrontation and then use deadly force to end it?  More significantly, why would Republicans want to turn this tragedy into a partisan issue?  Both Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum have criticized Barack Obama’s comments on this even though any reasonable person would see Obama’s response as that of a parent?

And what in the name of God was Spike Lee thinking?  He tweeted the address of what he thought was George Zimmerman to his 250,000 followers.  It was not Zimmerman’s address and the elderly couple subsequently barraged with news people and threats were forced to leave their home.  While Lee apologized for transmitting the wrong address, he said nothing about the act of encouraging vigilantes to enact their own version of justice.  What a nitwit.

How bad was the defense of Obamacare in the Supreme Court?  The immediate (and continuing) reaction of the punditocracy has been that Solicitor General Donald Verrilli completely blew the opportunity to explain the individual mandate to the nine justices.  They cite his opening remarks and the “necessity” of liberal justices bailing him out.  Verrilli’s opening has actually been made into a Republican campaign ad.  I listened to the early part of his presentation  (courtesy of WGBH in Boston) and thought the opening was not the result of utter incompetence, but possibly one of those moments when we have trouble speaking because of a minor throat issue.  I was embarrassed as he recovered and began to respond to questions from the justices.  But it was the Court for whom I felt the embarrassment.  One of the most significant pieces of legislation in our nation’s recent history was reduced to whether the government could require citizens to buy cell phones, burial insurance, automobiles and broccoli.  Yes, broccoli.  The justices asking such inane hypotheticals were from the conservative end of the spectrum.  I thought Verrilli answered such foolishness as best he could and kept to his main arguments.

Speaking of WGBH…  GBH has the strongest NPR signal emanating from Boston and is to be commended for carrying the recording of the entire argument before the Supreme Court with insightful commentary from a law professor at Suffolk University.  They also have a noontime program hosted by Emily Rooney, who has to be one of the dimmest bulbs in the public radio universe.  Two of her guests following one day of argument were authors of amicus curiae briefs.  Her assessment?  The briefs were “cute” and “a little bigger than Readers Digest.”  Now that’s the elite media we heard about from Republican candidates.  Rooney reminds one of the Fred Willard character from Best in Show.

Sinking even deeper into the mundane … I am a big fan of March Madness and watch as many games as I can.  When I say “I can,” I lack the stamina to stay up late and watch all 16 games on each of the first two days and limit myself to 8 games [sic] each day.  My observations from this year’s tournament:

  • It has been one of the least interesting ones in memory.  Aside from two 15-seeds beating 2-seeds and the referees robbing UNC-Asheville of a much-deserved victory over 1-seed Syracuse, there isn’t much to commend this year’s version.
  • My enjoyment of the tournament has increased significantly since I stopped doing brackets.  I have actually won these in the past, but hate to be in a position to be rooting for Duke over Lehigh because I have them going to the final four.
  • Why do the major programs have at least as many coaches as players on the court?  Five appears to be de riguer, but I have seen some sixes.

Speaking of basketball, how about that Barack Obama?  One of many lowlights in covering the Republican debates was one of the Saturday night ones where the question to the candidates was what they would be doing that night if not debating.  Rick Perry said he would be on the shooting range  –  on a Saturday night.  One said he would be watching the basketball championship.  Since the debate was on January 7 and the basketball championship will be next Monday, that would be quite a feat.  Two others said they would be watching the football championship.  At least they had the right month, but these regular guys, as they tried to appear, were not aware that the game would not be until two nights later.  Now one of the only things this group of candidates cannot say about the President is that he doesn’t legitimately follow sports  –  which is not to say that Mitt Romney will not try to make that case.  Obama was interviewed by Bill Simmons at the White House.  The interview, for which there is a podcast as well as a transcript was quite entertaining.

What is it about housing authorities?  Two of my favorite cities have recently dealt with significant problems with local housing authorities.  In the Boston area, the Chelsea Housing Authority had an Executive Director who was secretly paid an exorbitant amount of money ($360K), wrote himself an exorbitant “vacation and sick leave buyout” (over $200K) after quickly resigning, gave much-desired apartments to staff members, and took frequent business trips with a female assistant even though he is (or perhaps was) married.  In Saratoga Springs, the Executive Director was paid an exorbitant amount of money ($152K), and hired family members.  The Board “overseeing” his contract signed a five-year contract that renews automatically every year unless the automatic extension is terminated.  While they terminated the automatic extension following reports in The Saratogian, it appears to mean he has four years to go on his contract.  The SSHA gained fame most recently because they down-played a bedbug infestation that turned out to be as serious as residents claimed.  Yesterday’s Saratogian reports that a board meeting was just conducted in apparent contravention of the Open Meeting law.  Homelessness is, obviously, one of our society’s most significant problems and, in Massachusetts at least, one of its more intractable.  These housing authority issues indicate that a government model in which there is federal, state (or, in Saratoga’s case, city) and local housing authority is not a model that serves either residents or taxpayers.

Newt quote for March 24

Posted by noonante on March 24, 2012
Posted in: Political/Social commentary. Tagged: , , . Leave a Comment

This is the final in our series of the things Newt Gingrich has been saying over the years.  It certainly isn’t because we have exhausted the treasure trove from his history, or that he will cease making ridiculous over-the-top statements.  But it is clear his ongoing campaign for the GOP nomination has no chance of success and is merely a narcissistic exercise.

On Friday, President Obama commented on the killing of Trayvon Martin by a self-styled neighborhood watch vigilante.  He did not comment on any of the facts of the case because, as he explained, it is the Department of Justice in his administration that will be investigating the incident.  Instead, he spoke personally, both as a father and a President, saying “If I had a son, he would look like Trayvon.”  It was heartfelt, moving and, I thought, set the precise tone one hopes for from a President.

Newt Gingrich in an interview with Sean Hannity, as reported in Politico.com, called Obama’s remarks “disgraceful.”  He added:  “Trying to turn it into a racial issue is fundamentally wrong.  I really find it appalling.”

In the past, we have characterized Gingrich as a pompous, arrogant blowhard.  It turns out, he also has no class.

Etch A Sketch questioner

Posted by noonante on March 23, 2012
Posted in: Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , , . Leave a Comment

The person who asked Mitt Romney’s senior aide the question that elicited the “Etch A Sketch” response was not a reporter, but rather a comedian who happened to be a guest on CNN’s Starting Point, according to Slate.com‘s Dave Weigel.  While Eric Fehrnstrom’s response is destined to have a life of its own, comedian John Fugelsang’s response to Weigel’s interview had several noteworthy comments, such as:

“I’ve gotten so accustomed to outrageous claims from the Romney campaign going unchecked that I honestly didn’t think most of the media would pick up on it….  I thought it was a fair question and he gave an admirably honest answer.  Hence the irony that the Romney campaign is finally catching it because someone told the truth.”

Or this:

“I do feel that the subsequent furor has been fair.  Anyone who’s ever lost a loved one to breast cancer should be outraged that a guy who once donated thousands to Planned Parenthood is now boasting that he’s going to destroy it.”

Once again, it is the jesters of the realm who so quickly hone in on the truth.

Is Geraldo serious?

Posted by noonante on March 23, 2012
Posted in: Political/Social commentary. Tagged: , . Leave a Comment

It must be tough when you know that your obituary is going to feature one of the all-time screw-ups in television history.  I doubt that Geraldo Rivera’s comment on the Trayvon Martin killing was intended to erase memories of his Al Capone caper, but it does contribute to an embarrassing oeuvre.  According to Slate.com, Rivera observed on today’s Fox and Friends that the 17-year old’s “hoodie is as much responsible for Trayvon Martin’s death as George Zimmerman was.”

He went on to say that every time one watches a tape of a crime, “it’s a kid wearing a hoodie.”  He may have a point.  Ever since the repeated publishing of mass murderer (alleged, that is) Whitey Bulger wearing a Red Sox hat, you never see anyone wearing one anymore.  I have blissfully walked around wearing a hooded sweatshirt, never suspecting that this could result in someone stalking and killing me.

I wonder if Rivera thinks that Trayvon Martin’s race was as much a factor in his killing as his attire.

“A thick, flat gray screen in a plastic frame”

Posted by noonante on March 22, 2012
Posted in: Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , . Leave a Comment

“[A] thick, flat gray screen in a plastic frame” is Wikipedia‘s definition of the Etch A Sketch.  It could also describe Mitt Romney.  Just when it appeared that the protracted Republican campaign might be nearing its end after solid Romney victories in Puerto Rico and Illinois, as well as an endorsement by Jeb Bush, the Romney campaign stepped in it big time.

In case you missed it, Eric Fehrnstrom, a senior Romney aide, when asked if Romney’s hard right  –  or if you prefer, “severely conservative”  –  positions would hurt him in the general election, Fehrnstrom replied:

“You hit a reset button for the fall campaign.  Everything changes.  It’s almost like an Etch A Sketch  –  you can kind of shake it up, and we start all over again.”

Fehrnstrom should be given credit for answering one burning question:  Do they still make Etch A Sketches?  Remarkably, the answer is yes, and we can predict safely that sales have taken off.  But, what is wrong with him?

Fehrnstrom is not just any campaign aide.  He used to be a “communications director” for Romney  — you know, the person in charge of making sure the message gets out and no one says anything stupid.  He has been with Romney a long time and is now described as a ”senior aide.”  He is also a former reporter for The Boston Herald, a feisty tabloid that delights in extracting embarrassing quotes from political big shots.  I have had a fair number of dealings with the media because my former employer used to tab me to answer questions that could be negative or harmful.  The one thing I knew was to never say anything quotable, because anything quotable in a negative story would be, by definition, embarrassing.  So how does an experienced media hand whose boss has been running for President most of this century blow it?

The comment reinforces the narrative that Romney has  –  and will  –  say anything to get elected and has already generated obvious negative ads and comments by his GOP rivals and Democrats.  Instead of benefitting from positive momentum from the preceding week, the Romney campaign has quite successfully snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

Super Tuesday observations

Posted by noonante on March 7, 2012
Posted in: Political/Social commentary, Politics. Tagged: , , , , . Leave a Comment

Who was the big winner on the GOP’s biggest day so far this year?  It’s becoming a cliché to say Barack Obama, but it is hard to come up with a plausible alternative answer.  Mitt Romney was widely expected to win in Massachusetts, Vermont, Virginia and Idaho.  While he did do that, his winning percentages in the additional states he won were 38 in Ohio and 32 in Alaska.  Even his Vermont percentage was a remarkably low 40.  Rick Santorum could not hold the early polling lead he had in Ohio after being outspent by Romney by 4 to 1.  He did come away with wins in Tennessee, Oklahoma and North Dakota, but his percentages never topped 40.  Newt Gingrich poured all of his efforts and resources into winning his former home state of Georgia, but could not crack the 50 per cent barrier.  In the state where he resides currently, Virginia, he was not even on the ballot.  Ron Paul, thought to have a chance at winning one of the caucus states, is still looking for his first win this year.

There was a point earlier in this process when dismissing Paul’s chances at attaining the nomination was both widespread and often criticized by commentators because he had an enthusiastic level of support.  His prior strategy of amassing a significant block of delegates to bring to the convention is dissipating, and the commentariat now believes he has become a stalking horse for his son’s run in 2016.  He is, however, regularly receiving more votes than he did the last time he ran, and finished second in three states yesterday, narrowly missing another by .1 per cent. His 41 per cent in Virginia, where only he and Romney were on the ballot, is perhaps the true testament of how weak the front runner is.

By contrast, Newt Gingrich only made it to the top two in Georgia.  While he runs best in the South (for some reason, Oklahoma is now considered a southern state, probably because of its voting patterns), his performance outside that region is pretty dismal.  He ran fourth in every state not viewed as southern, with the exception of a distant third in Ohio, and usually did not even make it to double digits.  His campaign will nonetheless continue, and he may even experience yet another surge as it will be southern states voting next.

In the past two weeks Rick Santorum has demonstrated how he could both lose as an incumbent U.S. Senator by 18 points and be a serious threat to Mitt Romney’s inevitability.  His foolishness before last week’s primary in dissing John Kennedy, college and women using contraception probably cost him the W in Michigan.  But his “victory” speech last night shows why he remains a threat.  He spoke after winning three states, but before the Ohio results came in and, more significantly, before Romney spoke.  He was passionate, engaged and optimistic, and looked like a winner.  As I watched him, I was wondering how Romney’s staff was once again outfoxed on a tactical political decision.

And then came Romney’s speech.  It was authentic, charming and substantive.  Unfortunately, that was Ann not Mitt.    Her one false note was recognizing that “honorary Buckeye” Donald Trump.  Why this campaign insists on being identified with that clown is beyond me, but it is a campaign decision, not hers.  His speech was his usual uninspiring, slogan-filled pablum lacking in substance.  At one point he said he was “happy to be in the Bay State.”  Now, as a lifelong resident of Massachusetts, I have never heard anyone actually refer to the “Bay State” in conversation.  He was also surrounded by obviously programmed and fake chanting.  Once again, he gave no reason for his candidacy other than he is not Barack Obama.  The speech sounded more like a nomination-winning one, but not one that would have people rushing to take part in the campaign.