We are not a monarchy.    We left royalty behind when we ditched King George III.    Yet still the democrats seem unduly obsessed with political royalty.    It would as if having a queen for a mother would somehow make Charles actually fit to someday be king, from Nate Cohn, New York Times:

The Democrats running in the South this election season were not weak candidates. They had distinguished surnames, the benefits of incumbency, the occasional conservative position and in some cases flawed opponents. They were often running in the states where Southern Democrats had the best records of outperforming the national party. Black turnout was not low, either, nearly reaching the same proportion of the electorate in North Carolina, Louisiana and Georgia as in 2012

Somehow I doubt Cohn is endorsing Jeb Bush.

Perhaps most symbolic of the Democratic struggle was Ms. Nunn. She was the strongest Democratic Senate nominee of the cycle by some accounts: a prodigious fund-raiser and the daughter of a popular former senator. She had never run for office and thus had no record for which she could be easily attacked. And her opponent, David Perdue, was a corporate executive who once said that he was proud of his record of outsourcing.

Yeah daughter of a democrat politician a plus. Having run a real business a minus. Sure.

In Arkansas, Mark Pryor, a two-term Senate incumbent whose father was also a senator, won just 39.5 percent of the vote — less than three points better than Mr. Obama. Arkansas was perhaps the Southern state that held on to its Democratic tradition the longest after the 1960s, but it is hard to detect any tradition left today. The state also voted overwhelmingly for a Republican governor.


We would be better served if no child or a politician ever again run for public office.

One Response to “The Democrats And Political Royalty”


  1. EricFlorack