Well, should I? Don’t laugh. These days everybody seems to be. Even Rick Santorum’s back -= after a distinguished career in filmmaking.
Some months ago I was at Newsmax’s studio for the Steve Malzberg Show and — because he was so much taller than I — nearly bumped into Steve’s next guest on the way out. Who was that, I wondered? Then I realized — it was George Pataki, onetime governor of New York. Whatever happened to him, I thought? Now we know. He’s running for president too.
We’ve got a pediatric neurosurgeon, a mixed success CEO, a baker’s dozen of governors and senators (some former, others not), and, as always, possibly Donald Trump. Why not a mystery writer? At the very least I wouldn’t have assumed ISIS was the jayvee team. I know a good MacGuffin when I see one.
Okay, you’re probably asking, what’s my platform? (You’re not?) Well, to put it bluntly, I’m a libertarian neocon. Is that confusing? Let me clarify. On domestic issues, I agree with practically everything Rand Paul says. On foreign policy, I disagree with practically everything Rand Paul says.
In the words of Groucho Marx, “Those are my principles, and if you don’t like them…well, I have others.”
But enough of the highfalutin’ talk. Let’s get down to the nitty-gritty — the mother’s milk of politics — cash. I haven’t formed a SuperPAC yet, or even a PAC, but I’m prepared to do it if a sufficient number of you will get behind me. I know, you’re probably thinking you’d be wasting your money. You’d be better off donating to, say, the Clinton Foundation. But life isn’t just about uranium mines. Sometimes it’s about principles. (Okay, scratch that.)
Whatever the case, I have to decide quickly. I understand that — as of now — a maximum of ten candidates are going to be allowed to participate in the televised debates on the Republican side.
Hey, wait a minute. This suddenly turned serious. Election 2016, at least for the Republicans, promises to be, in the immortal words of Barack Obama, unfair. With about 58 people running — and if I take the plunge, 59 — how’re we going to determine who makes the cut for the big debates?
I have a suggestion. Aping one of the most successful shows on television, why not a “Republican Voice”?
Each candidate gets to make a speech of about 45 seconds (sorry, that’s all time would allow) while four “coaches” sit on revolving chairs faced away from them, deciding if they want the candidate on their “team.” For the coaches I propose New Gingrich (if he promises not to run himself), Bill Clinton (yes, he’s a Democrat, but he’s a decent speech maker and who knows better how to advise a prospective candidate on fundraising?), Charlize Theron and Kim Kardashian. The latter two are there for obvious reasons and, as you know, it’s hard to get on television if you don’t have a Kardashian. (Theron would have to sign a pledge she would never consult with Sean Penn about her decisions. If she doesn’t sign, Bruce Jenner could replace her.)
As the show goes on, various candidates would be eliminated, just as in the original “The Voice” with a final two emerging and then, voilà, a Republican Voice. I promise you it would get huge numbers, more than the debates possibly could, and the winner would be even more tested as a standard bearer.
Possible spinoffs? An Hispanic Republican Voice with Rubio and Cruz going mano-a-mano en español with Gloria Estefan as host. This alone could tilt the general election to the Republicans. Thoughts?
If this thing goes, I’d promise not to run. I wouldn’t want to miss an episode.