Road to the Nut House | Hacker News Reader

Road to the Nut House

peggynoonan.com

You'd be amazed how similar a new political campaign is to a tech start-up.

You're creating an entire organization from scratch. Hiring and training employees on the fly, getting expanded offices,

You have to fund-raise, only instead of VC you have to raise it individually from thousands of donors. Most people don't realize that successful candidates spend several hours a day just calling supporters and asking for money. It's worse than sales calls, because you're asking them to give you money, and they're getting nothing tangible in return. (as a side note, this is a big part of why so many politicians seem like snake oil salesmen. They're the ones who are good and willing to do sufficient call time)

The schedule is insane. You spend the whole day on the road, shaking hands and giving speeches, while at the same time keeping informed on local and national issues and forming coherent opinions about them. You're also expected to provide leadership for your campaign staff, and occasionally spend some time with your family.

In the end you either win big or get nothing.

I've always had the suspicion that anyone who would actually be an excellent president would have too much integrity to do that which it takes to get elected as president.

Maybe it should be a Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy type situation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minor_The_Hitchhiker%27...

I have a sneaking suspicion that integrity is not a functional or desirable trait in a politician. What we really want in our political leaders is someone who will be sneaky, underhanded, ruthless and downright duplicitous; on our behalf. Integrity is nice to have and desirable in your neighbors and friends, but politics is about survival, ethics is secondary (or rather personal and societal survival _is_ the greater good).

If cameras were on you, and people were writing down your every utterance essentially 24/7, wouldn't they be able to get at least a few pages of idiotic or 'mentally unstable' comments over the course of a few years?

Every candidate enters into that world by choice, but we have to remember that these are people, not just political philosophies (or lack thereof) made manifest.

That book sounds fascinating. Politicians have such a manicured image that it can be hard to tell what they're really like. Even things that seem normal (going bowling, ordering food, having a beer) are designed to appeal to voters. Anyone that has such a level of cynicism is at least a little bit crazy.

The book is full of great anecdotes and makes for really entertaining reading if you followed the 2008 election with any interest.

Is the fact that McCain is an empty suit and a handshake news to anyone? Or that Clinton is a moody castrating bitch? Or that Obama is kind of arrogant? Or that Palin is vapid?

The shallowness, the lack of seriousness of modern presidential candidates is almost unbelievable.

No, it's totally believable. And perfectly predictable.

Why? Because these are people who, for the most part, are totally out of touch with reality. Why? Because they've never actually had to work for a living.

The classic case was an adult Ted Kennedy not able to figure out how to pull shopping carts apart because he had never seen them before. Sometimes I wonder how many D.C. office holders, if left alone in the woods without a cell phone, would actually live.

We have this community here at hn where we beat technical and business issues to death as we strive to improve ourselves and that which we produce. Most of those running for office are 180 degrees away from that. Most political office seekers commenting on this board would be laughed off as "posers" in nanoseconds.

Political candidates, like startup founders, would do everyone a big favor if they first joined the real world and produced something of value for someone else. Until then, "unbelievable" will remain the norm.

"they've never actually had to work for a living."

So let's see... of the main contenders in 2008, John McCain served in the military and worked in public relations for a beer distributor, Obama was a community organizer and lawyer, Edwards was a lawyer, Clinton was a law professor and administrator, and Palin was a sports reporter.

Those all sound like jobs to me. And I'll go even further and say senator and governor sound like perfectly valid full-time jobs.

I'm also willing to bet politicians who stump have contact with a far wider range of people than almost anyone else. How many Iowa steak frys and ag fairs have you attended lately?

Those all sound like jobs to me.

Except the OC said "work for a living" not "hold jobs." I'm pretty sure that those of us on HN who have been inside larger organizations know the difference can be stark.

I would further fine-tune the assertion: they have never had to create wealth for a living.

Those all sound like jobs to me.

To anyone who has ever had to run a business, they all sound like days off. Military and government couldn't possibly function without threatening incarceration in order to get their revenue. Public relations for a celebrity, administration, sports reporter? Vacations.

far wider range of people and Iowa steak frys seem like contradictions in terms.

It's one thing to campaign for votes to feed your ego. It's another to get dollars from customers to feed your children.

If you choose to look at it in those terms, any business ultimately depends on the threat of incarceration to get its revenue. Depicting government as an obstacle to free enterprise is like calling roads an obstacle to cars going wherever they please.

I run a business and those jobs all sound like hard work to me. Maybe you're doing it wrong!

McCain earned the monicker "Ace" in the Navy for losing 5 aircraft. The only reason they kept giving him new ones was he was a 4 star admiral's son. His PR job was glad-handing, not usually what one means by "working for a living". (I dont' mean to denigrate his service, just reporting.)

"Community organizer"...I'd get downvoted if I commented on this one.

"Lawyer"...

Clinton was a law professor for a very short time. Pure politics after that. I don't think he ever held a job in high school or college other than chauffeuring Sen. Fullbright.

Clinton worked in a fish cannery and as a dishwasher, among other things. McCain's cushy PR job came after a prolonged period of rotting in a Vietnamese prison. I don't really follow your insinuation about community organizing, but where I live (SF) it tends to take the form of working long hours for minimal pay in some dire neighborhoods.

So I fail to see the point you're trying to make. What is the threshold of 'real work' career politicians have to cross before they are legitimate in your eyes?

In the book this post references, everyone except Palin is shown to have an enormous capacity for sustained hard work.

The classic case was an adult Ted Kennedy not able to figure out how to pull shopping carts apart because he had never seen them before.

Do you have a source on that? It sounds like classic urban legend to me. In fact it sounds like a variation on the urban legend about George H.W. Bush being amazed because he'd never seen a bar scanner before (http://www.snopes.com/history/american/bushscan.asp).

Page 70 of this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Senator-Ten-Years-Ted-Kennedy/dp/03123...

Huh? That page contains nothing at all about Kennedy supposedly not knowing how to pull shopping carts apart.

(What it is is an anecdote of Ted Kennedy being boorish. But there has never been a shortage in that department, and it's not what was at issue here.)

'He presides looking “vaguely bored,” his detachment “striking but not entirely unusual.” '

Is it ad feminam to remark the Ms. Noonan came to public notice writing speeches for Ronald Reagan who was noted for "detachment"?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com