April 22, 2008
As the Pennsylvania primaries are taking place today, I was thinking about
this whole concept of "electability" that all the politicians, their surrogates and
the pundits are discussing ad nauseam. Hillary claims that she is more
"electable" than Barack because she is winning big states like California, New
York and Pennsylvania. Barack counters by arguing that, since he is winning
states like South Dakota, Mississippi and Missouri, he is more "electable"
because he is putting traditionally Republican-voting states in play. John
McCain, who has put to rest his "electability" issues vis a vis Romney,
Huckabee and Giuliani, is now having to address "electability" concerns
related to his age, his anger issues and his association with an unpopular
President (George W, for those of you keeping score at home).
In stark contrast to those pretenders, I would like to point out that not a single
commentator or political observer has called into question my "electability". I
consider myself to be the most "electable" candidate in the race today, for
several different reasons. First off, and most importantly, I have the lowest
reported income of all the candidates in the race. I won't go into details on this
matter, but suffice it to say Hillary most of the candidates donated more to
charity than I made last year. This helps me connect with the average Joe, and
gives me a credibility when talking about economic issues that the other
candidates just don't have. Second, I have no overall credibility issues like the
other candidates. Nader is just plain crazy, McCain is old and wants to invade
the entire Middle East, Hillary lies about sniper fire and Barack associates with
shady characters. Those traits in and of themselves shouldn't automatically
disqualify the other candidates, but their inability to embrace these
weaknesses should. I readily admit that I am crazy and that I associate with
shady characters, and that I sometimes lie and drink too much. In other words,
I have credibility.
Finally (and most importantly), if you look at a state-by-state analysis of
primary voting, I am the only candidate who has carried every state so far:
As the Pennsylvania primaries are taking place today, I was thinking about
this whole concept of "electability" that all the politicians, their surrogates and
the pundits are discussing ad nauseam. Hillary claims that she is more
"electable" than Barack because she is winning big states like California, New
York and Pennsylvania. Barack counters by arguing that, since he is winning
states like South Dakota, Mississippi and Missouri, he is more "electable"
because he is putting traditionally Republican-voting states in play. John
McCain, who has put to rest his "electability" issues vis a vis Romney,
Huckabee and Giuliani, is now having to address "electability" concerns
related to his age, his anger issues and his association with an unpopular
President (George W, for those of you keeping score at home).
In stark contrast to those pretenders, I would like to point out that not a single
commentator or political observer has called into question my "electability". I
consider myself to be the most "electable" candidate in the race today, for
several different reasons. First off, and most importantly, I have the lowest
reported income of all the candidates in the race. I won't go into details on this
matter, but suffice it to say Hillary most of the candidates donated more to
charity than I made last year. This helps me connect with the average Joe, and
gives me a credibility when talking about economic issues that the other
candidates just don't have. Second, I have no overall credibility issues like the
other candidates. Nader is just plain crazy, McCain is old and wants to invade
the entire Middle East, Hillary lies about sniper fire and Barack associates with
shady characters. Those traits in and of themselves shouldn't automatically
disqualify the other candidates, but their inability to embrace these
weaknesses should. I readily admit that I am crazy and that I associate with
shady characters, and that I sometimes lie and drink too much. In other words,
I have credibility.
Finally (and most importantly), if you look at a state-by-state analysis of
primary voting, I am the only candidate who has carried every state so far:
| Electability - April 22, 2008 |
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
|
Not only have I won all the States, but I also carried Guam, Puerto Rico and
the U.S. Virgin Island. Early returns show that I'm also leading in
Switzerland, Zambia and Argentina. When you're talking about "electability",
you're talking Brad Willard!
the U.S. Virgin Island. Early returns show that I'm also leading in
Switzerland, Zambia and Argentina. When you're talking about "electability",
you're talking Brad Willard!