So, that doesn’t sound all that promising. No money, doesn’t like fundraising, low name recognition. And the times I’ve heard him interviewed, he sounds about as charismatic as John Kerry.
A primary challenge would probably be a waste of time unless, as Flake notes, the Republicans get killed in the midterms and Trump is seen as dragging them down. If Trump is still in office, I think he’ll get the nomination pretty easily.
An Independent bid sounds better to me, as it would hopefully pull enough votes away to benefit the Democrat. But, Flake has generally supported Trump’s policies, so will he run as an independent just to ensure Trump doesn’t get re-elected, or will just make a token show of resistance in a primary and then support the guy who promises more tax cuts and deregulation?
Probably means nothing right now, but an independent run would almost certainly put Arizona in play – and if he got any momentum going, could easily swing the election towards a landslide for the Dems, even putting states like Texas and even Utah into play. But right now that’s mostly wishful thinking.
Flake is at least at the not-crazy end of the Republican pool. I disagree with him on most of his policy positions but he seems like a normal person able to speak in coherent sentences and not stab himself in the eye with a fork while eating pizza. Yes, this is where the bar is now set for GOP candidates.
Plus he does that weird desert island thing, which is at least novel.
I’m also wondering if McMullin might go for it again.
Seeing how enamored the GOP is with Trump, would they side with Flake?
Someone should run against Trump in 2020 but I don’t know who. Kasich would be a good person to run against him, but then if you start crowding the field then you have issues.
It’s not fair that the name a person is born with can hurt (or help) them in life, but it does appear to be a fact. As with any topic in human psychology, many factors are at play; still, having a mockable name seems unlikely to help a candidate:
Humans are weird.
But if the GOP could find a candidate named Macho Manly Toughguy, they’d probably be smart to run him.
I once met a guy at a meeting wearing a “My Name Is” badge with the name “Bob Faggot”. People kept assuming the “t” was silent (Hi, Mr Faygo) or the “gg” was pronounced like a “j” (Ahhh, Mr Fajot) or it was some weird foreign name (Good evening Mr um Fägôtę).
He’d just chuckle and say, " I’m Bob Faggot, pronounced just as it’s spelled! Please call me Bob."
Seriously, the research on the topic (some of which is discussed at the link I posted) does indicate that people’s names can influence their behavior.
If Anthony Weiner had been named Anthony Loyal, maybe he wouldn’t have put so much energy into impressing women-not-his-wife with cell phone shenanigans.
(Or if he’d been named Anthony Elbow, he would still have tried to impress other women through cell phone pics, but they’d have been of…something else.)
I’m laughing my ass off at this comment…sorry…it’s nothing personal, you’re a good poster and a smart guy, but Kasich already demonstrated very clearly that he was not capable of defeating Donald Trump. What exactly makes you think he could do it the second time around? Maybe you’re assuming that Trump is going to fuck up so badly in the next 4 years that his base will abandon him, but I’m sure as hell not going to make that assumption. Kasich was a pathetic candidate and continues to be a pathetic candidate.
He has moderate name recognition now, and if he actually ran would gain recognition as that Republican guy who is running against Trump. Unless Trump undergoes a major scandal that turns off his base, Flake has no chance in the primary as a Republican. As an independent he could act a spoiler for Trump except for the fact that <<Democrat yet to be named>> would probably win even without his help.
My impression of Flake is that he’s not as crazy as Tom Coburn and not as corrupt as Orrin Hatch, but would appeal to a lot of folks at the intersection of their appeal. He’s not on my team; his beliefs about government are very different from mine; I fear what he’d do to public lands, because I don’t think he has any environmentalist tendencies. But I think he has ethics.
He has two huge problems that I can see: One, he’s LDS, so the Baptists won’t turn out for him. Two, he’s probably too principled for the pro-corruption elements of the party, however important those may be.