![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I am occasionally praised for my writing on the Presidential primaries, though it should not be surprising. For months (especially around now) politicos are hanging out in Iowa and New Hampshire waiting for the latest news. I am already in Iowa, so......
So I know what is going on right when it happens.
So when a bunch of "Kelso for President" signs show up in West Des Moines, I am there.
First of all, I am not surprised. He is an Iowan, so he already has an in with local voters. Second, Mila Kunis would be a great First Lady; and lastly, it's not any crazier that Ashton Kutcher could be President than Donald Trump.
Oh, not that Kelso.
Ok, so you know me, and I always have a good laugh at those Quixotic folks who make a run for President. Just think, politicians with name recognition and sizable resumes and qualifications like George Pataki and Jim Gilmore and even Chris Christie - as known and qualified as they may be- have little to no chance of being President.
Also, with apologies to Lloyd, we haven't voted for a President with Facial Hair since Taft. Ever since Marx, Lenin and Hitler, we haven't been able to commit to anyone but a clean shaven politico. I'm not saying that won't change, but it hasn't.
In any case I usually make fun of these little-known contenders, but I am not making fun of Kelso, and here's why
1- He is running a Democrat. While this race started as a sure Clinton nomination, that looks to be less and less of a possibility. This may mean the eventual nominee is someone like Joe Biden or Al Gore or even someone like a Jim Webb or Martin O'Malley. in any case, there are some serious conversations that a 70-year old Jew who has spent the last two decades self-identifying as a Socialist may be the nominee. That an attorney no one has heard of from North Carolina has any less chance doesn't seem to ludicrous.
2- While most longshots have websites that look like those Geocities sites and often full of misspellings, and usually some flashing text and bright colors and random capitalization. Kelso seems to be pretty spot on in making a point and being well written
3- Kelso's platform seems to be mainly about reforming tax laws to put the responsibility on taxing the ultrarich (such as removing the cap on Social Security). So he's got some well-thought out ideas on income equity. interestingly, his social platform is Conservative. He talks about closing the border, preserving the 2nd Amendment, repealing Obamacare, getting tough with Iran- real Conservative issues.
So, I am not sure that I am totally on board with all of his views, but I appreciate the heck out of them. I am reading a bio on William Jennings Bryan, Bryan was very liberal in terms of "Free Silver" but also as we saw from the Scopes Trial, deeply Religious.
Bryan quite simply couldn't exist in today's politics. It's hard to imagine a Democrat who would take a strong Conservative social stance. On the Republican side, things are even less likely to vary.
Take for example, Common Core. This is something that was supported by several GOP governors - Jindal, Jeb, Christie, Kasich- but as it is out of favor, those same governors (with the exception of Kasich) are falling over themselves to try and distance themselves from it.
Indeed, it seems to be you are agreed on all issues of the Party or your out. This could be Newt Gingrich forced to go hardline on immigration or Ben Carson pulled to make a strong Gun Rights stance.
Life is gray, but our politics are black and white in 2015. Can you be pro-gay marriage and anti-abortion? Could you be for gun laws but against income tax? Quite simply, there only seems to be 2 stands and you must fit in one.
Anyway, that's a convo for another day. Here's a shout out to Lloyd Kelso- at least consider him
So I know what is going on right when it happens.
So when a bunch of "Kelso for President" signs show up in West Des Moines, I am there.
First of all, I am not surprised. He is an Iowan, so he already has an in with local voters. Second, Mila Kunis would be a great First Lady; and lastly, it's not any crazier that Ashton Kutcher could be President than Donald Trump.
Oh, not that Kelso.
Ok, so you know me, and I always have a good laugh at those Quixotic folks who make a run for President. Just think, politicians with name recognition and sizable resumes and qualifications like George Pataki and Jim Gilmore and even Chris Christie - as known and qualified as they may be- have little to no chance of being President.
Also, with apologies to Lloyd, we haven't voted for a President with Facial Hair since Taft. Ever since Marx, Lenin and Hitler, we haven't been able to commit to anyone but a clean shaven politico. I'm not saying that won't change, but it hasn't.
In any case I usually make fun of these little-known contenders, but I am not making fun of Kelso, and here's why
1- He is running a Democrat. While this race started as a sure Clinton nomination, that looks to be less and less of a possibility. This may mean the eventual nominee is someone like Joe Biden or Al Gore or even someone like a Jim Webb or Martin O'Malley. in any case, there are some serious conversations that a 70-year old Jew who has spent the last two decades self-identifying as a Socialist may be the nominee. That an attorney no one has heard of from North Carolina has any less chance doesn't seem to ludicrous.
2- While most longshots have websites that look like those Geocities sites and often full of misspellings, and usually some flashing text and bright colors and random capitalization. Kelso seems to be pretty spot on in making a point and being well written
3- Kelso's platform seems to be mainly about reforming tax laws to put the responsibility on taxing the ultrarich (such as removing the cap on Social Security). So he's got some well-thought out ideas on income equity. interestingly, his social platform is Conservative. He talks about closing the border, preserving the 2nd Amendment, repealing Obamacare, getting tough with Iran- real Conservative issues.
So, I am not sure that I am totally on board with all of his views, but I appreciate the heck out of them. I am reading a bio on William Jennings Bryan, Bryan was very liberal in terms of "Free Silver" but also as we saw from the Scopes Trial, deeply Religious.
Bryan quite simply couldn't exist in today's politics. It's hard to imagine a Democrat who would take a strong Conservative social stance. On the Republican side, things are even less likely to vary.
Take for example, Common Core. This is something that was supported by several GOP governors - Jindal, Jeb, Christie, Kasich- but as it is out of favor, those same governors (with the exception of Kasich) are falling over themselves to try and distance themselves from it.
Indeed, it seems to be you are agreed on all issues of the Party or your out. This could be Newt Gingrich forced to go hardline on immigration or Ben Carson pulled to make a strong Gun Rights stance.
Life is gray, but our politics are black and white in 2015. Can you be pro-gay marriage and anti-abortion? Could you be for gun laws but against income tax? Quite simply, there only seems to be 2 stands and you must fit in one.
Anyway, that's a convo for another day. Here's a shout out to Lloyd Kelso- at least consider him
