Thoughts about 2016. [View All]

[burning rain]

It's not too early for Democrats to begin considering who we should nominate for president in 2016. We have been caught behind national trends previously, and to our injury. In 1994, for instance, Republicans found in talk radio a new medium for rallying the conservative base that Democrats had largely ignored, and hit upon the idea of nationalizing the off-year elections with the Contract for America, while Democrats relied on the old Tip O'Neill paradigm of all politics being local. More recently, however, Democrats and lefties have more than held our own in use of the Internet--but an even bigger paradigm shift is nearly upon us.

Too many commentators to mention have explored the phenomenon of Americans becoming more consumers than citizens. Given that this trend appears irreversible even with a Democratic administration and Congress, Democrats and lefties in the realist camp must set ourselves to the task of embracing this change and making it work for us rather than the opposition. Fortunately, for the time being they remain stuck with gray, colorless leaders not even capable of mastering television, as did Bill Clinton and, on their side, Ronald Reagan.

Early in the 2004 Democratic presidential primaries, Howard Dean became the first true Internet-driven presidential candidate--the first to ride what I shall call the second wave of media stardom in a credible campaign for a major party's presidential nomination (taking television as the first for purposes of brevity). John Kerry and his supporters also made a good use of the Internet in his ultimate quest for the presidency as the Democratic nominee. In 2008 Barack Obama and his campaign made an even more powerful Internet push, which in a narrowly-decided primary season may be regarded as indispensable. His campaign, for all its substantive policy proposals, and his public discussion of them, also provided an unprecedentedly high level of more purely charisma- and emotion-driven campaigning largely decoupled from issues, with the relatively less concrete themes of "Hope & Change," "Yes We Can!" "Fired Up! Ready to Go!" Fan tributes from Obama Girl and the like, along with the apolitical exploits of a cartoon Obama in animation from Jib Jab and others, also served to create depoliticized Obama proxies with high entertainment value, and ability to "sell his brand."

For all Barack Obama's ability to connect with voters on a purely emotional level, he shares a shortcoming with all the aforementioned politicians: he, like them, is human, and the paradigm of human politicians is approaching obsolescence. Human politicians have biographies--embarrassing revelations can come out and cripple their political ambitions--and their parties' prospects for victory--within a media cycle. Human politicians are prone to gaffes and can commit crimes. They can die in office. And they almost always have political positions, which inevitably alienate many who don't share their views, no matter how exquisitely hedged or concealed by false advertising they may be.

The transition to cartoons as elected officials is inevitable. A carefully chosen cartoon candidate is sure never to offend voters with skeletons in his closet, or pesky political positions displeasing to some or many. A cartoon may be completely apolitical and appeal to pure consumerism. A cartoon will never die in office or even get sick and puke on the Japanese prime minister. The inherent advantages of cartoon politicians are innumerable. This brings us to the question of who, specifically, to nominate in 2016.

The Geico Gecko is probably the ideal candidate. He is friendly, outgoing without being overbearing, and has a charming sense of humor. He never says anything unpleasant and has no politics. He just lets Geico and the rest of the business world do what it wants. He's never shagged an intern, driven drunk, or had a nasty divorce. Best of all, as a green lizard he appeals equally to all racial and ethnic demographics. A lizard can unite us. Having nominated a lizard for president, we need a vice-presidential candidate with powerful appeal to our party's human base. Nominating Erin Esurance would increase our chances with some key demographics. An attractive, athletic, outgoing young woman, she would doubtlessly prove a tremendous help with the youth vote: girls would want to be her BFF; guys would daydream of being with her. The fact that nearly every young person in America would friend her on Facebook could in itself give Democrats a free media advantage sure to crush the Republicans in November. She's never flip-flopped on a key political issue, because she has no political positions--she just wants to put an attractive face on letting Esurance, and business generally, do its thing. Isn't that the ideal political candidate?