THEN: Secretary of State (KY), 1996-2004; Candidate for Lieutenant Governor, 2007
NOW: JYB3 Group (Owner) -public affairs consulting firm; Miller Wells law firm (Of counsel)
Full Biography:link
I’ve enjoyed mixing it up and teasing it out—for fun and with friends.
We’re all tired and need a wrap on this. Look, all I’m saying is that I won’t be surprised if Mitt Romney shows up at the next NH debate with a headset mic a la Anthony Robbins.
He can pull it off, look great, impress listeners. Heck, I’ll even buy his CD set. He’ll score points for fashion and suave, but lose votes—again.
Or, as Krystal Ball so succinctly put it, instead of convincing voters “he’s perfect” to be their next president, Mitt will seem “too good to be true.” A subtle but important distinction for recovering politicians.
So, no, Mitt probably doesn’t need to punch out Rick Santorum Tony Soprano style (even if he wants to). But he darn sure better muss his hair and stay away from headset mics as America focuses in to finally decides if Mitt is real enough — and not too good enough — to be president.
Remember, we voters can sometimes steal a page from Goldilocks, as we all look for the presidential candidate that is neither too big nor too small, neither too hot nor too cold. But just right. And just right for the times we face.
Great point, Ron, but let me play the contrarian’s contrarian on looks and politics and point out that although I brought up the issue and am trying to make the case that we need to think more deliberately and deeply about the candidates than we do, I still seem to vote for the better looking ones myself.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that it’s important to be deep when discussing presidential politics, but don’t underestimate the shallow. Not because of shallow voters.
Read the rest of… The RPs Debate Presidential Leadership: John Y. Defends
Jeff’s post reminds me of the famous story about the Nixon –Kennedy debates.
On TV Nixon, who had refused pancake make-up, had his infamous 5 o’clock shadow and sweated profusely. Kennedy, by contrast, was cool, calm, and collected—and at his Kennedy-esque best.
Those voters watching on television believed Kennedy won by a 3-1 margin. Those listening on radio believed Nixon won by a 3-1 margin.
Which opens up an entire new line of discussion: How has TV has changed the message and the messengers—we get for political candidates today?
Abe Lincoln would have withdrawn from Iowa months before Michelle Bachmann had to. And if Mitt Romney had showed up to debate with Lincoln and Stephen Douglass a while back, he would’ve have been laughed off stage and beaten up as a dandy. But that’s another thread altogether.
Read the rest of… The RPs Debate Presidential Leadership: John Y. Defends
Great commentary and insights and I feel the Alpha-male urge to jump in and defend my original point. No sucker punches. Promise. But possibly some territorial markings.
First, Rod, please forgive my depth and seeming over-analysis. I try not to reflect in mixed political company because it’s bad manners. Reflectiveness, I feel, is the liberal counter-point to Republican toughness. George Bush II, Rudy Giuliani, Dick Cheney and much of the Republican leadership class for the past decade ran the electoral tables with the tough guy brand. By contrast, we Democrats fought back with candidates that promised to out-reflect and out-analyze their republican opponents. This Democratic approach has not worked well electorally.
In fact, it was observing Republican campaign tactics over the past couple of decades that led me to conclude the key to electability isn’t an intellectual exercise or the sum and substance of a campaign platform — but rather a successful visceral appeal. And that Democrats needed to find a way to connect with voters in a more raw and basic way than reeling off data and exuding likability.
Read the rest of… The RPs Debate Presidential Leadership: John Y. Defends
By John Y. Brown III, on Mon Jan 9, 2012 at 8:30 AM ET
Today, we launch a new feature at The Recovering Politician: The RPs Debate. In this format, one of our contributors will make a provocative post, and others will jump in with their responses. We will publish a new response every half hour. If you like it, we’ll try it again soon. If not, at least some of us had a fun weekend arguing.
When women kiss it always reminds me of prize fighters shaking hands. — HL Mencken.
I thought of this quote watching the Iowa presidential primary returns last week. I was thinking about the basic competitiveness among the men and women–with their own sex.
That quote made me laugh when I read if for the first time as a college student because, as a guy, I was just starting to notice that women were often more competitive than they seemed. Of course, women know this all along but young men– who tend only to notice round objects that can be thrown or resemble the shape of a sandwich or remote control — often miss subtler body language.
Fast forward another 20 years, and I begin to notice the subtler competitiveness among men. Oh, I suppose I always sensed it but never paid full attention to it — until recently. The put down, the standing slightly taller, the one upsmanship stories, the sarcastic joke that makes you a bad sport if you don’t laugh at yourself But there is another level…that is more concerning and more important among men. Fear of being replaced by a younger man….that mixes envy and fear and pride. The mature man becomes generative….a mentor. He accepts his new role with gusto and doesn’t try anymore to win foot races against younger men but to help coach him and teach him not only how to run faster but to be a better man, husband and father. Women, of course, experience this too but I’ve been thinking more about the male reaction to this pressure and it’s significance — to individuals, to families, and even to nations.
So, what does it look like in it’s most basic form? Like this (watch clip below)
Read the rest of… The RPs Debate: Presidential Leadership — John Y Provokes
By John Y. Brown III, on Fri Jan 6, 2012 at 9:00 AM ET
I want to share a few memories about Gatewood Galbraith, a KY statesmen, who died Tuesday night in his sleep.
I don’t claim to know Gatewood as a good friend, but he was much more to me than a casual acquaintance. I ran in several statewide races alongside Gatewood.
Political candidates are a bit like athletes traveling together across the state appearing to shake hands and give speeches wherever twoor more registered voters are gathered. There is a camaraderie that develops. And a respect and friendship that lasts.
As a young man I knew Gatewood the way everyone else knew him, as the hilarious, unrestrained, whip-smart, loquacious character who added comic relief and trenchant insights to KY’s governor’s races.
One of the first debates I watched with Gatewood he defended medicinal marijuana by saying something along the lines of “We aren’t talking about people who get drunk, cross state lines and trash hotel rooms. We are talking about people who will mellow out and order a pizza and fall asleep.”
But because he wanted to legalize medicinal marijuana (coupled with the fact he looked like he just dressed himself and shaved from the back seat of his car) he was never taken as seriously as he could have been. And I wondered how seriously he wanted to be taken. Gatewood could have been an able governor had he ever found a way to get elected, but I’m not sure he really ran to win. I think he ran because he couldn’t not run and because he had something to say and people wanted to hear it. And it beat practicing law seven days a week.
And he was at good running for office—extraordinary, in fact. It just made sense for Gatewood to run. And keep running. And because of that, he mattered a lot to a lot of people across our great state.
Read the rest of… John Y. Brown, III: A Few Memories About a KY Statesman
By John Y. Brown III, on Thu Jan 5, 2012 at 12:30 PM ET
It’s not a medical breakthrough to reverse memory loss.
Consider it more of a coping mechanism. And a darned good one at that.
Maybe memory loss is inevitable with the aging process….but don’t despair. Don’t cede anything to our younger colleagues! Instead, finesse!
You don’t need to know a whole lot in this life to be profoundly effective, successful and fulfilled. We really need only to kno…w “a little.”
The trick is to have some attitude about the little we still retain. And sometimes, if need be, ratchet up a little more attitude to drive the point home.
Afraid you’ll have trouble remembering all this? Don’t. Watch the video–repeatedly–until it becomes second nature. It says it all. And with the attitude.
By John Y. Brown III, on Wed Jan 4, 2012 at 12:30 PM ET
Post Election Final Thoughts:
I applaud yesterday’s chaotic, surprising, and uniquely American process leading to the narrowest of narrow victories by the front-runner and a near shocking underdog upset–accompanied by a respectable third place finish from an independent and brainy gadfly.
It reinforces my belief in our democratic system. And however messy and unpredictable, it’s still a thing of beauty to behold. And to be grateful for.
Finally, if I had to pinpoint a regret it is that the race didn’t last one more week and have one more candidate with one more wise admonition. The extra week may have allowed Sen Santorum’s sensational surge to run its course ….and see the final candidate I would like to have seen in the mix peak and prevailed at just the right moment, Chance Gardner. And in his acceptance speech, in my fanciful ending, candidate Gardner would admonish Americans in Iowa and beyond by quoting Voltaire from Candide (discussing Chance’s favorite topic, gardening). “Let us cultivate our own garden.”
But I’m a romantic. And it was a Republican primary. Let’s be real. A French quote (even a self-reliant quote) to summarize the moment’s electoral message, was probably too much to ask.
As the pundits and Wednesday morning quarterbacks assess the winners and losers of last night’s Iowa caucuses, one verdict is clear: Our savvy gang of RPs couldn’t shoot straight.
Reviewing their predictions from yesterday, click here for the infamous post, only RP staffer Zack Adams predicted the correct finish of the top 6 candidates, and former Alabama Congressman Artur Davis was the only recovering politician to predict the correct order of the top 3.
Most humiliated was The RP himself. Not only did he forecast a last-minute Ron Paul surge (30 points — come on?!?), but then, after the entrance polls “confirmed” his predictions, he bragged on Twitter and Facebook about how he was whipping fellow RPs Jeff Smith and John Y. Brown, III. We imagine that the RP has crawled back into his spider hole awaiting redemption in New Hampshire.
At least recovering politicians can laugh at themselves. Here’s John Y.’s thoughts from last night when it looked like the RP and Jeff Smith had bested him:
Post Iowa Primary Prediction: Although it’s still too early to know how things will shake out tonight….it appears Jonathan Miller and Jeff Smith and a passel of others from the RP blog, will do a better job predicting tonight’s outcome than I did.
So, I need to come back in a big way tomorrow—and I will!!
My big prediction? Newt Gingrich will go long and score big –again—with the one Secret… Weapon he has mastered so well—the florid and grandiose press release.
I predict Newt will provide a “shock and awe” release tomorrow morning that taps into something in millions of American voters who know deep down that any candidate who can use words like “literati” and “minions” in a campaign press release is a man who can and probably should be president.
And maybe, just maybe, history and Providence will ensure that “Out of the billowing smoke and dust of tweets and trivia emerged Gingrich.”
After two years of campaign, hundreds of pundit prognostications, and thousands of cable news sound bites, at long last, what you’ve been waiting for…
Our fearless contributors — Contributing RPs, Friends of RP and RP Staff — offer their predictions for tonight’s Iowa caucuses.
And you can too — please give us your predictions in the Comments section below.
Without further ado…(Click on their name to find out their background)…
The RP: Paul 30%; Romney 25%; Santorum 21%; Gingrich 7%; Perry 6%; Bachmann 4%, Huntsman 1%. I don’t think Rick “Man On Dog” Santorum’s organization is strong enough to take advantage of his surge. I also think Paul’s support is underestimated in the polls because his grassroots support is so fervant, and the tin foil hat crowd among his followers are fearful of pollsters. Remember Pat Robertson?
Jeff Smith: Santorum 27; Romney 23; Paul 23; Perry 11; Gingrich 9; Bachmann 6. I think some Bachmann/Gingrich/Perry folks walk in to their caucus, see how outnumbered they are by Sant-mentum, and get on the bandwagon.
Jason Grill: Romney, Paul, and Santorum will finish first, second, and third. The order though is more “up in the air” than George Clooney was in his recent Oscar nominated movie. Organization and friends twisting other friends arms at the caucuses will decide the order of the top three. If Romney finishes third that WILL be news and change the race somewhat moving forward. He will be seen as an even weaker front runner if this happens. Also, it will be interesting to see where Perry and Gingrich finish tonight. Keep a lookout for their percentages at the end of the night. A fourth place finish for Perry over Gingrich will signal a potential showdown with Romney in South Carolina. Lastly, I am anxious to see how Huntsman finishes in next week’s New Hampshire primary after skipping Iowa.
Mark Nickolas: Paul (25%); Romney (23%); Santorum (22%); Gingrich (11%); Perry (10%); Bachmann (6%). Iowa requires a level of commitment from supporters unlike anywhere else. Those with the best state organization and strongest levels of commitment do especially well (Paul and Paul). Also, since Independents and Dems can participate if they want to cross over — as Indies did for Obama in ’08 — that’s likely to help Paul the most. Nefarious (aka loyal) Dems are going to support anyone but Romney to ensure a protracted GOP race, with Paul and Santorum benefitting most.
Rod Jetton: I think Ron Paul will just nip Romney and Rick Santorum will get third. Newt probably finishes in 4th. The Ron Paul forces are dedicated and with his numbers going up they and their friends have started believing he can win. They will turn out and surprise all the experts.
Greg Harris: Santorum – 26%; Romney – 25%; Paul – 21%; Gingrich – 12%; Bachman – 8%; Perry – 7%; Huntsman – 1%. Santorum’s diligent grassroots work throughout the State this past year will pay off, resulting in more ardent caucus warriors advocating his case, and moving some on-the-fence Bachman and Perry supporters. Ron Paul’s fanatical base will still assure him over an over 20% showing. The minority moderate voters will hold their noses and back Romney.
Read the rest of… Our Contributors Predict the Iowa Caucuses…
John Y.’s Closing Argument
I’ve enjoyed mixing it up and teasing it out—for fun and with friends.
Follow John Y: