Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

So what's the solution? Get celebrities to run for office. (Seriously.)

Over 60% showed up to the gubernatorial elections won by Schwarzenegger [a] and Ventura [b]; you know, the former body builder and the former wrestler, who co-starred in Predator... Wasn't George Clooney born in Kentucky? He might be a "rich old white man" at this point, but do you think Mitch McConnell (or any incumbent, for that matter) would stand a chance against him?

If Brad Pitt, James Franco, Shaquille O'Neal, or Ashton Kutcher ran for office... they'd win. And they'd be better representatives, because they're not career politicians, and they don't know how the system works. Then watch as normal people are suddenly tuning into CSPAN to catch a speech by Sen. Pitt or Rep. Shaq. I'm surprised the major parties didn't court celebrities after 1984, when a former actor captured the highest number of electoral votes in history...

"It's Charisma, Stupid" is focused on presidential elections, but pg remarks near the end that he's "not saying that issues don't matter to voters. Of course they do." Yes, issues do matter to voters. But voters are generally a minority, at least in non-presidential elections. The majority cares more about movies and sports because celebrities are interesting. Existing politicians are boring.

I read the other day that Allen Iverson is basically broke, recently divorced, had a house foreclosed, and doesn't know what to do with his life after basketball...

a. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_gubernatorial_recall...

b. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_gubernatorial_electio...



Another advantage is that celebrities, by definition, aren't in politics to acquire fame and fortune. This has the potential advantage that they might be less able to be bought off.


Though perhaps the perfect counter-example, here, is career politician Jerry Brown's successes in turning around California's fiscal situation:

http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21579483-jerry-b...

His tenure, as many know, immediately followed Schwarzenegger's, who was less successful.

In fairness, though: Brown seems to be exceptionally good this time around, and I'd bet that most people believe Arnold's problems didn't stem from too much partisanship or a lack of good faith effort.


Or they could be single issue candidates, a particular form of corruption IMNSHO, like Clint Eastwood as the Mayor of Carmel. His restaurant then finally got its liquor license or expansion permit or whatever his issue was, I forget the details.



Thanks. I got my timeline wrong, he got his thing done and then ran for office.


If that's true, then why do many already rich celebrities continue to participate in grossly commercialized lowest common denominator work? Being rich doesn't mean you don't want to be richer.


A rapper does a few hours work, it buys him a new car. Very rational cost-benefit, even if short-sighted. It'd seem exceptionally inefficient for that rapper to launch a political career for the purpose of increasing his fortune, particularly with the increased scrutiny and fewer post-term consulting gigs he'd have compared to your average politician.

I can see celebrities doing it for the fame though-- specifically to show that they're "more than" an actor, singer, athlete, or whatever.


Maybe the like doing it?

Or maybe the solution is just to pick celebrities that hold themselves to high standards. So... not Nicolas Cage.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: