Moving on, we get to Condoleeza Rice—because, of course, former Secretaries of State represent such a sharp break from “the conventional governing class.” The case for Rice seems to be that she has held both Republican and Democratic associations, she is generally seen as moderate and temperate, and she balanced the budget while serving as Stanford provost. As for whether she has, you know, anything to say about our current political and economic challenges, VandeHei and Allen acknowledge that, “Rice would need to find a sharper, more populist voice.” But don’t worry about that, they assure us—“she can play at this level.”
Rounding out the line-up is Erskine Bowles, the former White House chief of staff (so unconventional!) who served as co-chair of President Obama’s deficit reduction commission. I can’t decide whether Bowles is the least depressing or most depressing of the candidates here. On the one hand, he’s closely identified with a specific agenda that is responsive to a real, long-term national challenge. On the other hand, it’s the wrong challenge to be obsessing about right now. VandeHei and Allen open the Bowles blurb thusly:
The most depressing reality of modern governance is this: The current system seems incapable of dealing with our debt addiction before it becomes a crippling crisis.
No, no, no. The most depressing reality of modern governance is that the current system seems incapable of dealing with the fact that 25 million Americans can’t find full-time work. Meanwhile, though the long-run budget problems are real, rates on Treasury bonds are dropping so low that, as Karl Smith notes, the real cost of financing the federal government over ten years is “quickly approaching zero.” That VandeHei and Allen don’t get this is a perfect example of how the unemployed become invisible, and the deficit becomes paramount, in the eyes of the Beltway press.
The whole Politico Primary feature is especially maddening because Politico can be so much better than this. Its horse-race coverage is often stellar. Though not an investigative powerhouse, it does solid work on campaign finance and influence peddling. And its coverage of federal agencies, while sometimes scant on policy specifics, does a good job tracking which side is prevailing in important arguments.
But when Politico decides to be splashy, it still often comes across as witless; the savvy present in its day-to-day work simply vanishes. And even if this is just a fun reader engagement gimmick, readers deserve better than that.
Update, 10/10: Perhaps unsurprisingly, the reader nominations (selected by VandeHei and Allen from submissions via Twitter) are as uninspired as Politico’s picks. One ex-general apparently wasn’t enough, so now we’ve got Colin Powell alongside David Petraeus. And one professional deficit hawk apparently wasn’t enough, so now we’ve got David Walker—former head of the Government Accountability Office, and now CEO of the Peterson Foundation—alongside Erskine Bowles. Then there’s a moderate Democrat, Virginia Senator Mark Warner; a moderate Republican, former Utah Governor (and, of course, current actual presidential candidate) Jon Huntsman; and a billionaire independent, New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg.
None of these folks is going to be the next president, but they might all share the stage at a No Labels conference one day. If nothing else, the exercise shows that even in an era of unprecedented partisan polarization, what used to be called the “Beltway consensus” still has a deep bench.
My favorite nugget from the new batch of candidate blurbs is the line at the end of Walker’s entry that notes he was nominated by Mark McKinnon, a “former strategist for President George W. Bush” who is quoted endlessly in the Beltway media. Because, again, this feature is motivated by the failure of “the conventional governing class.”

Today in Lynchburg, we had Sarah Palin and Herman Cain stop by.
Cain is pretty impressive, and I was kind of shocked to see a few of things:
1. He drew a huge crowd at a book signing - much larger than I would have thought.
2. He seems to be connecting with a lot more of the black population that I thought he would have connected with here - Lynchburg's black population has traditionally been about as rock-solid Democratic as is possible, and the city has deep racial divisions in social, economic and geographic terms that have persisted forever.
3. He is quick on his feet and imposing in presence. Having seen him, I wouldn't expect to oppose him without a fight.
Three months ago, I considered his run to be a publicity stunt, but after seeing him, I have to say I think he's in it for real. Of course, there is no way he'll get the nomination, given the party shenanigans, but I really do think he is committed to the race.
#1 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sat 8 Oct 2011 at 11:46 PM
I think CJR has said everything needed about this disgraceful display of hackery. Politico is the new Onion.
#2 Posted by Al Dorman, CJR on Mon 10 Oct 2011 at 03:21 PM
What Politico fails to recognize, and what most of the political-oriented news reporters, editors, producers, commentators, analysts, and pundits also fail to recognize is that THEY themselves have become part of the "conventional governing class."
Reporting about unemployment or mortgage foreclosures or the vaporization of retirement savings or the crushing burden of health care and medical costs seems disengenous, at best, and cruelly insensitive, at worst, when the reporting is done by individuals in million dollar jobs sitting in comfortable studios and newsrooms, royally dressed and coifed, and as distant from the travails of everyday Americans as the Congressional and Administration leaders they "chat with" daily.
#3 Posted by Andy Juniewicz, CJR on Mon 10 Oct 2011 at 06:00 PM
Certainly an odd ball mix of candidates and wannabes that dreamers would have us believe are viable? Did the State Dept stuff the Politico ballot box? You've got #2 who NO ONE knows, and #1 Hillary warmonger who is directly responsible (along with Susan and Samantha) for our attacking Libya when everyone agrees that Libya posed NO THREAT to the US, real or imagined. All of this when the US is dead broke, $9 trillion in debt, and teetering on the brink of national default. Running the US dollar down to zero value hardly qualifies as leadership. We badly need a money person, someone who appreciates the value of stable currency and with that said, Michael Bloomberg is the only candidate among the 10 who qualifies. Conspicuous, by the absence of his name, is Donald Trump. Are we to assume that righteous effete snobs deliberately looked the other way?
#4 Posted by Ronald Amon, CJR on Fri 14 Oct 2011 at 08:24 AM
I've been searching around for a long time for an honest reporting outlet that will cover campaign finance. No one seems to do it anymore. It's as if reporters are afraid that if they link politicians' policies to their major donors they'll lose access. I wish there was a program like Northwestern's Innocence Project where instead of investigating wrongfully convicted criminals, graduate and undergraduate journalism students researched who is funding today's politicians and how those donors are benefiting from their political connections.
Because obviously the mainstream media doesn't want to get involved anymore.
#5 Posted by AJ, CJR on Fri 14 Oct 2011 at 10:08 AM
Good to see that Condoleeza Rice's utter incompetence as National Security Advisor on 9/11 or in the runup to the Iraq war didn't negate her chances.
#6 Posted by Col Bat Guano, CJR on Tue 18 Oct 2011 at 03:31 PM