Governors Who Would Be President
Election of Governors should be watched closely since their office requires that they “govern.”
Their experience in governing may be contrasted to the ideas of members of the U.S. Senate who value Progressive ideology over ability to govern well. From their perspective, “good government” is Progressive government.
Maximizing the power and ideas of “Progressives” was made possible by ratification of the 17th Amendment in 1913. That Amendment coincided with growing influence of “Progressives” who wanted to circumvent the influence of State legislatures in the method of selection of U.S. Senators established in 1789.
By subjecting election of Senators to popular vote, college educated “Progressives” could attain power for their ideas, over and against the power of corporate interests in States, and traditional mores, traditions and folkways in individual States. First signs of revolution that was to come occurred by accident when Theodore Roosevelt succeeded an assassinated William McKinley in 1901 and Progressives elected one of the United States’ most “Progressive” Presidents, Woodrow Wilson, in 1913.
Twenty-first century Progressives did not seek office by election as State governors, and some, Starbuck’s founder Howard Schultz and Wall Street fund manager, Tom Steyer, are celebrities with no government experience.
Divisions in Presidential politics are not representative of “tribalism” in American culture so much as they represent Progressive ideology vs. traditional motives of government service.
Understanding the future of American politics for the next decades requires that we assess the abilities of contemporary Governors of States and current members of the U.S. Senate. Long term health of the body politics will turn on how often successful Governors are elected to the office of President of the United States.
