Amy, I Think I Could Stay With You
…for a while. Maybe longer, if I do.
Amy Klobuchar will be an also-ran. You know it, I know it, and it’s likely she knows it. And that’s a real shame, because I believe Amy is someone who could lead this country.
She lacks the presence and poise of Kamala Harris, the highbrow intellectualism of Elizabeth Warren, or the cult fan club of Marianne Williamson. In fact, the only female candidate she obviously outshines is poor Kirsten Gillibrand, the wallpaper of 2020’s hopefuls.
But she has grit, determination, and sensibility.
Born and raised in Minnesota, Amy is the daughter of a newspaper columnist and an elementary school teacher. She was high school valedictorian, got her undergrad degree from Yale, and her law degree from the University of Chicago. She practiced corporate law then served as a county prosecutor for 8 years before winning her senate seat, which she has held since 2007. As she noted at July 30th’s Democratic debate, she easily won even those Minnesota districts that went to Trump in 2016.
As senator, she has a reputation for bipartisan negotiation. At the end of the 114th Congress in 2016, Amy had passed more legislation than any other senator, having her name on 27 successful bills. But her first real national notice came during her participation in the Kavanaugh hearings last fall. In proceedings in which political darlings Cory Booker and Kamala Harris vied for the soundbite spotlight, Amy was composed, dignified, professional and effective in her questioning. Kavanaugh himself expressed his respect for the senator, and later apologized for a flippant retort in which he asked Amy, the daughter of an alcoholic, whether she’d ever drank until she blacked out. She was, as the saying goes, the adult in the room.
But Amy is not without detractors, despite her solid competence and pragmatism. Subsequent to her announcement of her candidacy, stories came out about her difficult temper, and alleged abuse of her staff. She was accused of throwing a three-ring binder which hit a bystander, berating staffers, and demanding their assistance with personal errands. And then there was the infamous salad comb incident. For her part, Amy didn’t deny the reports:
I can be a tough boss and push people — that’s obvious. But that’s because I have high expectations of myself, I have high expectations of those that work with me, and I have high expectations for our country.”
Compared to her ambitiously progressive counterparts, Amy is pragmatic. Having voted in line with President Trump over 30% of the time, she is a moderate, somewhere to the left of Kyrsten Sinema and the right of Elizabeth Warren. Her top issue is not a utopian healthcare system or drastic environmental policy; it’s infrastructure, for which she unveiled a trillion-dollar plan in March. She ticks several boxes for the more mainstream policy positions such as gun control (she favors universal background checks and a ban on “assault” weapons), raising teacher pay, and protection for DACA and TPS recipients. She advocates emphasizing “workforce readiness” as an alternative to college for high school students. She wants to tackle mental health and substance abuse treatment, in part with an additional one-cent per milligram tax on opioids. Amy’s focus on sensible changes rather than sweeping reforms earned her the derisive nickname “the Senator of small things.”
Maybe that focus on small things is the way to go. Clearly, this country is not collectively in the mood for grand overhauls of our institutions, however fouled up they are. If she could get the attention of the masses who bristle at the newest incarnation of the “radical left” but are nonetheless unhappy with the opposing direction of political wind, they may find her a refreshing ally.
What she lacks in bells and whistles, Amy makes up for with intelligence, toughness, and practicality. Unfortunately, she has not found a way to stand out and her time in the race may be coming to an end, based on her dismal performance in the polls. But until then, I’ll stay with Amy. For a while, maybe longer.
Well she’s doing well enough in money and polling that she’ll make it to the next debate at least and it soothes my discomfort to know she’s there. If Joe implodes then there’ll be at least one rock solid candidate for moderates to rally to and maybe if the winnowing starts soon she can pick up support. She’d also make a pretty damn good VP choice.
The job toughness allegations don’t move me a lot. Two anonymous people levied accusations and then over 60 current and former staffers put their names to the record to contradict it. I’ll go with the public majority over the anonymous griping personally.
Great analysis Em.Report
Klobuchar is one of the Dems I could maybe vote for. Her record as a prosecutor is a bit bothersome but other parts are good. Wonder if she’ll be on the list of VP candidates to shore up the Midwestern flank.Report
As former waitstaff, I hear a number of the anecdotes of how Klobuchar treated her staff and I don’t hear “high expectations for herself” when I hear them.
I hear the Dave Barry line: “A person who is nice to you, but rude to the waiter, is not a nice person.”
Eh, it’s President. You don’t need to be nice anymore. Why would you want someone nice in that position? What about Trump?
But, still. One of the lenses I see people through is how they treat the help. There aren’t a whole lot of anecdotes about the quality of bossness flowing through the Democratic hopefuls which means that, on this particular toggle, I’ve still got an open mind on them.
On Klobuchar, the toggle is down.Report
Fair enuff, I’m a former server myself- hotel front desk; and the anonymous accusations of Klobuchar’s abuse don’t seem to have set off the geyser of follow up “me too” responses that I would expect if this was some big expansive habit of hers.
Now that could just be that she’s simply not high enough profile in the race for anyone to bother or it could be that the anonymous hit simply was designed to puncture her “nice” public face and provide an excuse for people not to vote for her; if so it served its purpose.Report
I was never a server either, nor hotel front desk staff, but I was an airman. We could always tell the difference between “this flag officer is a very busy, very serious person who has a lot of stuff on her plate and doesn’t really have time to make nice with we enlisted folks” and “this guy not only doesn’t have time for us, but he probably wouldn’t MAKE time for us, and he might very likely hold us all in contempt.” I don’t know enough about Klobuchar to tell which one she is, but stories about rudeness to the help aren’t positive.
And that quote! If that isn’t an answer to the interview question, “Tell me about your biggest weakness,” then I don’t know what it is. I do like the “Senator of small things” nickname, though. Indicates that she’s willing to focus on the possible instead of trying to Thanos her way to big changes.Report
Laura Ingraham is reportedly horrible with her staff. Several long, pre-air clips are on Youtube and she is pretty demanding, but maybe it only looks that way because she was pretending to be a horrible person for the camera that she probably didn’t realize was recording everything as she did her show prep.
With Klobuchar, I think it goes even deeper. She had an abusive, alcoholic father and some think she internalized his behavior, lashing out at those around her because that’s what he did, too. In parallel with that, she avoids confrontation (ironic, isn’t it) because to her, a confrontation is a fight. So she hurls abuse at underlings or others but is ineffective in really personally confronting anything important because that creates friction.
These would be horrible traits in an executive official because the emotional bullying and abuse shut down outside input as everyone ducks, and very important executive decisions would be the result of pissing contests and assertions of dominance rather than from logic. In a crisis situation that would be a disaster. For example, if she was in “one of those moods”, a general telling her she’s badly misreading a situation would get shouted down, if not fired on the spot. The rest would learn to keep their mouth’s shut.Report
Oh, I’m not qualified to make statements about what she’s like and why.
I just know that, as a former waiter, I recognize the stories told about her and her own explanations for those stories. And it turns my toggle to the “no thanks”, setting.Report
Back in college (in the early 1980’s) one of my brother’s roommates was a waiter at one of the top restaurants in town. One evening Mitch McConnell was there and my brother’s roommate was a bit slow getting the butter out to his table. McConnell got very testy over it and said “Do you know who I am?!” My brother’s roommate said “Yes, but do you know who I am?” McConnell said “No, who are you?” And he replied “I am the man with the butter!”Report
You’d have to fire that guy.
I mean, unless McConnell busted up laughing and bought a round, you’d have to fire that guy.Report
Good heavens, why?Report
LOL. Like Mitch would be a regular customer in a Lexington restaurant.
But he does have a point. The rolls came out without butter, and you just never do that. It’s like bringing nachos without the salsa, a pie without a fork, or a pitcher of beer without the mugs.
These should clearly be criminal violations.Report
Dude…
“These would be horrible traits in an executive official because the emotional bullying and abuse shut down outside input as everyone ducks, and very important executive decisions would be the result of pissing contests and assertions of dominance rather than from logic. In a crisis situation that would be a disaster.”
Said I to all the people I knew were conflicted about voting for Trump.Report
I agree with the OP that she could probably be a good president, but I’m also shocked how quickly not just the author but Dems in general dismiss her behavior. Al Franken was run out of the senate for frankly a lot less. For shame…Report