[Eugene Volokh, January 4, 2008 at 12:54pm] Trackbacks
"There Was a Market Failure

and I was it" -- a great quote from Senator, Presidential candidate, and economist Phil Gramm:

A dozen years ago the then-Texas Senator had beaucoup bucks, a pile of endorsements, and a solid conservative platform [going into the primaries]. But as Mr. Gramm told us after his loss in 1997, "There was a market failure and I was it. People just didn't take to me."

From John Fund, in OpinionJournal's Political Diary.

Kazinski:
I so wanted Phil Gramm to win in 1996, I saw him as a perfect blend with the principles of Reagan, the wonkiness of Bill Clinton, the homespun wit of Harry Truman, and the mean streak of Lyndon Johnson.
1.4.2008 1:08pm
Thorley Winston (mail) (www):
Kazinski said it better than I could.
1.4.2008 1:34pm
Cold Warrior:
Fred Thompson.
1.4.2008 1:41pm
DG:
Thompson is not Phil Gramm. He's more likable and less capable.
1.4.2008 1:43pm
John M. Perkins (mail):
I like the Gramm principle, that if a member of a legislature wishes to switch parties, they need to resign, and run under the new banner.
1.4.2008 3:02pm
Federal Dog:
Can't. Stop. Laughing.

I was just looking at Inside Higher Education, where the academy's finest are weighing in on the primaries. One poster is advocating an Obama/Kucinich ticket, while another cites rumors that Clinton will recruit Cynthia McKinney as a running mate to mount a comeback.

For once, I really think people should listen to our nation's faculty. At least it will be a fun year. Bwahahahahaha!
1.4.2008 3:19pm
PJT:
"I like the Gramm principle, that if a member of a legislature wishes to switch parties, they need to resign, and run under the new banner."

This just strengthens the hold the two major parties already have on the US political system.
1.4.2008 3:22pm
BGates:
Federal Dog, I think if they're going to speculate on those lines, they need to go all the way and advocate McKinney/Kucinich.
1.4.2008 3:51pm
DG:
McKinney/Kucinch is clearly the winning ticket. Perhaps with Ron Paul as Secretary of State? We really shouldn't leave him out of this.
1.4.2008 4:30pm
Arkady:

I so wanted Phil Gramm to win in 1996, I saw him as a perfect blend with the principles of Reagan, the wonkiness of Bill Clinton, the homespun wit of Harry Truman, and the mean streak of Lyndon Johnson.


"There was a market failure and I was it. People just didn't take to me."

Maybe y'all better refine your market research.
1.4.2008 5:20pm
Federal Dog:
BGates and DG:

"I think if they're going to speculate on those lines, they need to go all the way and advocate McKinney/Kucinich"


Speaking as an aficionado, that would be incandescent lunacy. Things could not get any more fun than that. The proposal must be in the works in some literature department somewhere.
1.5.2008 3:22pm
Milhouse (www):
I was also very disappointed when Gramm pulled out of the race after Iowa, and didn't even make it as far as New Hampshire. By the time that primary came around to me I don't think there was anyone left that I cared to vote for; at the general election I honestly couldn't have cared less whether Dole or Clinton won it, so I voted for Harry Browne. Even in hindsight, Clinton's victory in that election was no more of a disappointment than Dole's would have been.
1.6.2008 3:47am