During the campaign, you’ll hear candidates criticized for being in office too long; “they lost the fire in their belly,” but you will also hear candidates criticized for running for critical positions such as governor or Congress who have no experience. Well, what is it? The fact that both of them are paraded makes us suspicious.
Let’s look at history. Ronald Reagan was governor of California for eight years and then president for eight years. After his first presidential term, would we say he is a swamp monster? Of course not.
Donald Trump never held any office before running for president, but now many of us believe he ranks with Reagan as one of the greatest presidents of all time. Hardly anyone talked about his lack of experience, and certainly not now.
The problem is that there are some swamp monsters that need to go, but that doesn’t apply to everyone who has been in office for a long time. Some can survive the pressure of talking lobbyists and the cocktail party circuit. And not all up-to-date candidates for office are clueless about this; some are extremely dazzling and piercing, have worked in a field that has given them extensive political knowledge, and have other types of qualifications.
A candidate who attacks someone for being in office too long will most likely find himself in the same situation in the future and not raise it as an issue.
Two prominent conservative candidates in Arizona have faced this criticism. One of them is Kari Lake, a former longtime news anchor from Phoenix who is running for governor. But she immediately became the leader of the race and remains so, puncture all of her GOP primary opponents combined (including former Congressman Matt Salmon) for most of the race, thanks in enormous part to her smarts. As a news anchor, she has become very familiar with politics, hosting the number one show for over two decades. She didn’t just come out of high school and run for office.
On the other hand, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich is running for U.S. Senate, but word of mouth is rife that he has no fire in his belly and is under attack for being part of a long-standing quagmire. However, he has only been in this position for just over seven years, which is not a lifetime term. People who know him well call him “Arizona’s Ron DeSantis,” but because behind one of his opponents, Blake Masters, is Peter Thiel, a billionaire from outside the Silicon Valley state, and the other main candidate is also a billionaire, they introduced him as part of the problem. He has reportedly sued the Biden administration more than any other AG, but he doesn’t take credit for it.
This is not the only nonsense criticism thrown at the candidates. RINOs attack Lake for being a Democrat in the past. This criticism was also directed at Reagan and Trump. Lake’s involvement as a Democrat appeared to be fairly minimal, with a few relatively compact donations in the mid-2010s.
Another criticism leveled at candidates is their past work for the government. It doesn’t matter that they were only a few years into their career and this position was a respectable job, e.g. prosecutor, opponents will throw bombs. Brnovich worked as a prosecutor for most of his career, but he also served as director of Constitutional Government at the Goldwater Institute.
Criticism that affects people emotionally criticizes candidates based on wealth. It’s straightforward to attack them if you’ve never had money, it’s a natural reluctance. They are accused of not understanding the problems faced by ordinary Americans, of being born with a silver spoon in their mouths. But many of them came from needy children and rose to the top – this is the real American dream – why should they be punished for it? What if the choice was between a ranting, broke, left-wing social worker and a conservative born into money? Many Hollywood stars have come out and said that they wish they were born into wealth because it caused a lot of problems for them.
Many Founding Fathers it came from privileged environments. One article refers to them as “America’s first one percent.” By today’s standards, Thomas Jefferson would be considered a billionaire. George Washington’s father was a circuit court judge, and the family owned hundreds of acres of land. James Madison’s father inherited and married into considerable wealth. John Adams entered Harvard at the age of 15. Alexander Hamilton studied at Columbia University. Benjamin Franklin was wealthy enough to retire at the age of 42.
Whether you like it or not, wealth is still extremely critical in politics. The most hard-working and charismatic candidates often find that they are unable to compete with someone who has millions. There was a lawsuit in Ohio filed regarding Trump’s endorsement of J.D. Vance, accusing Thiel of illegally coordinating with Vance’s campaign to obtain Trump’s endorsement. Many conservatives were irritated when Trump endorsed Vance over solid conservative Josh Mandel.
So it was no surprise when Trump endorsed Thiel’s fellow Masters candidates over Brnovich earlier this month. However, Trump supports the candidates not always win; although he has become much more selective in the candidates he supports, seven of his primary candidates have lost so far this year.
Finally, criticism of celebrities running for office is as untrue as criticism of attacks on the wealthy. A few years ago, I predicted that we would never have another Republican-elected president unless a star came along – and then Trump came along. Similarly, Lake’s meteoric rise in the Arizona governor’s race is due in part to her recognition as a local celebrity in the greater Phoenix area. He has been proven to have solid, conservative values.
So the next time someone criticizes a candidate for one of these characteristics, ask yourself if it’s truly justified or if it’s being used to denigrate a true conservative.
