The Guffaw Factor

In which our man Will Durst grades the candidates according to their potential to supply political comedians with at least four years of decent material. Damn that Buchanan for blowing the curve.


We all have vested interests. They’re the main reasons we favor a particular candidate. Might be his or her stance on a single issue, like the establishment of a commission to block Steven Seagal from directing any more movies. Could be something in the candidate’s background like drug use, or even the way he picks his nose. We’re people. And capriciousness is one of the best parts of our nature.

That’s why I don’t want Clinton to quit. I need him. I’m a comedian. And he was great for me. And no, I’m not talking about that whole Lewinsky thing. That turned every two-bit hack into a political comedian for 30 seconds. I’m talking about the way his scruples blew away like dandelion seeds in a wind tunnel. No matter what you thought of his policies, you had to admire his ability not to get involved with them. I say screw the 22nd Amendment. Four more years!

Of course, I will always have a job no matter who gets elected. With 24-hour news channels and the Internet news cycle, we get to know way more than we need to about these guys. And an eventual gaffe, crisis, or revelation is a dead solid certainty. So with that said, here’s a rundown on what the future might hold for me.

Nader/LaDuke: Most likely the best shot for the country to level the playing field, but face it, Nader has the sense of humor of an end table and the charisma of Kevorkian. He makes Al Gore look positively electric. Also, I agree with most of what he says, and would find it most difficult to mock and scoff and taunt. I’d probably be forced to mine that whole “legalize marijuana” stance which means I’d be free to reclaim decades old material.

  • Grade: D+

 

Gore/Lieberman: Probably good for the country, but a disastrous choice pour moi. After eight years, RoboVeep is too well known a commodity. Would rather spend four years watching varnish harden than the strained ministrations of a Gore administration. Lieberman could be interesting, but how many pork jokes can one comedian not named Jackie Mason do?

  • Grade: C-

 

Bush/Cheney: I’m rooting for them. Although why anybody should vote for a candidate whose own running mate couldn’t be bothered to is beyond me. But Bush is attractive in oh, so many ways. Even members of his own party say he’s not the sharpest knife in the drawer. I say he’s more like that slotted wooden spoon that keeps getting caught in the garbage disposal. For me, that’s gold, as is his mangling of the English language. A Bush win could prove to be Quayle-esque in its comedic magnitude. Which is to say: Hall of Fame material.

  • Grade: A-

 

Buchanan/Foster: “Ah, Sweet mystery of life, at last I’ve found you.” It would be like discovering a Mickey Mantle rookie card in the lining of my sock drawer. Can you imagine? It would be like my birthday, Christmas, and New Year’s Eve all rolled into one. The other comics and I, not to mention the editorial cartoonists, would jump up and down like kids in a candy store after we ditched the adult supervision at the track.

Buchanan is just a little to the right of Pol Pot, and stuff falls out of his mouth like toxic waste leaking from a fried-up garden hose. Then there’s his running mate Ezola Foster, who received disability compensation from the state of California for a mental condition which she now claims she never had. So she’s either a fraud or crazy. Gotta love that combo.

  • Grade: A+++

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate

Share your feedback: We’re planning to launch a new version of the comments section. Help us test it.