Skip to main content

Carefully managing Julian Castro
It is uniquely a Democratic Party phenomenon; when a dark horse wins the presidency and the terms have expired, that comes in its wake? Here come the over-the-hill wanna-be hacks who have already been through the presidential candidate grinding machine, and despite the fact that they have already been found wanting, here they are again, deluding themselves and all their Democratic friends that this time it is 'their turn' on the throne.
It is the old trap of arrogant entitlement so prevalent with Democratic Party politicians. What makes it all the more annoying is that the highest seat of office is seen as a dynastic right, that somehow the public will approve of the presidency as a 'family affair'. For those of you with long enough memories, we can all remember how well that went.

Would Hillary make a good president? Of course she would. Hillary Clinton has a long track record as an excellent high administrative official capable of good, sound judgement.
Would she win? Probably not.
Nothing gets the Republican elephant so excited as when you wave Hillary at it, and you can be sure her candidacy will have them hitting the voting booth high numbers.
Then there is the 'old face' phenomenon. Even a sympathetic voter likes something new. Watching old guard politicians with all them bone-rattling closets banging about during election time gets very, very tiring. They just don't get it. There is no 'their turn'.
The Democratic Party always does well with the 'Dark Horse' approach, but the tactic is so often stymied by the hovering barflies of yesterday's political repast.
Obama's 'promotion' of Julian Castro to the running of HUD might be seen as a benign positive move, but perhaps there is a not so hidden agenda here. Basically, it gets rid of him as a potential threat to Hillary Clinton's bid for the highest office. By becoming the head of HUD, it is with the understanding that this will sideline him into the vice president candidacy, thus eliminating him as a potential rival for 2016.
Julian Castro has shown himself to be a very intelligent and charismatic individual; were he to run for office in 2016, he would certainly bring a lot of latino citizens to the voting booth.
On the other hand, were he to end up playing second fiddle to a presidential candidate who's chances of carrying the prize of the presidency are at best questionable, then win or loose, by 2024 he would be just another Democratic political hack going in for failed seconds.

Having been reelected for a third term as Mayor of San Antonio with 82.9% of the votes, he has proven himself to be a highly popular political figure.
Could the 'dark horse' approach work again for the Democratic Party? Being the first Hispanic to deliver the keynote address at a Democratic National Convention in 2012 hardly makes him any more obscure than Obama was when he gave his Democratic National Convention address a scant term before his presidency.
Obama was a dark horse and he won; Castro can too. Hillary - as much as I respect and like her - can't.
Dark horses work well for the Democratic Party. Ultimately, the US electorate have a messianic bent, and Democratic voters like new blood, so it would make sense that rather than sidelining Julian Castro as a 'step and fetch it' man for the hair apparent, he ought to be their front running candidate.
At least they would stand a chance of winning.


Julian Castro, if leading Democratic candidate, would you vote for him?

61%69 votes
14%16 votes
24%28 votes

| 113 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (0+ / 0-)

    If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to see it - how do you know there is a forest?

    by zappedpyramid on Sun May 18, 2014 at 11:03:22 AM PDT

  •  Giving someone the job of Housing and Urban (15+ / 0-)

    Development is not sidelining. It's mentoring. And good for the country.

  •  I'd only vote for him.. (9+ / 0-)

    if he were the nominee. I'd never support him in the primary, at least not yet. He hasn't done anything to warrant my vote. Making a good speech is what got Obama into the presidency, and frankly, I haven't been particularly impressed with his ability to stand firm against Republicans.

    Castro's from a deep-blue city. He's never had to deal with an intransigent Republican legislative body. And frankly he doesn't have the experience to be president.

    In a decade or two, yes, I'd love to see him run. In fact, I imagine that's his destiny. He'll run for the governorship of Texas when it's a purple or blue state. He'll win the governorship. And then he'll be well-positioned to be the first Hispanic-American President.

    But that's a long way away. Let him make his bones here in Texas. I don't want him to be on the national stage before he's ready.

    TX-17 (Bill Flores-R), TX Sen-14 (Kirk Watson-D), TX HD-50 (Celia Israel-D). Senate ratings map (as of 3/10/14)

    by Le Champignon on Sun May 18, 2014 at 11:13:40 AM PDT

    •  Don't know about that governorship (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      His name gets mentioned pretty often as a potential VP, so he may not get around the governor thing (although I agree that would be the better path for him)

      “Texas is a so-called red state, but you’ve got 10 million Democrats here in Texas. And …, there are a whole lot of people here in Texas who need us, and who need us to fight for them.” President Obama

      by Catte Nappe on Sun May 18, 2014 at 11:28:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Texas is too red (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Texas is still too red and will be for the near term.  No matter how popular he is in San Antonio, his chances of winning a statewide office in Texas are still really slim.

        •  But IF he ran statewide, it might trigger a (0+ / 0-)

          massive wave of voter registration. By population, Texas is a lot closer to blue than it votes; because too many of the eligible Latino voters aren't registered and voting.

          Castro running for a statewide office would change that, but I'm not sure how much.

          In any case, voter registration is key, the faster we get eligible voters registered, the faster the state turns.

          Information is abundant, wisdom is scarce. ~The Druid.
          ~Ideals aren't goals, they're navigation aids.~

          by FarWestGirl on Mon May 19, 2014 at 12:55:39 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Obama had a long list of accomplishments (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      not just a great speech prior to winning the nomination. He did more in the Senate in 3 years than Hillary managed in 8. And he's also got more accomplished than any president since LBJ.

      President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

      by askew on Sun May 18, 2014 at 12:49:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  State Senator Obama had a huge important (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        davybaby, askew, wu ming, FarWestGirl

        accomplishment that had national implications.u
         When he first tried to pass a law mandating all criminal interrogations be recorded he met fierce opposition from the DA and Police Department, Judges, politicians all against the law.  But he kept on trying to convince all his opponents of the importance to not just protect the suspects but the police too.  In the end he succeeded in winning them all over to his thinking and the law passed and spread to all States and is a cornerstone of our justice system.
        He is a great man.


        We are not powerless!! "Activism is the rent I pay for living on this planet."– Alice Walker

        by nocynicism on Sun May 18, 2014 at 02:21:32 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I don't know if he wants to wait (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      for Wendy Davis to finish her second term in 8 years though.


      There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

      by Cali Scribe on Sun May 18, 2014 at 10:41:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  srsly? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elmo, terrybuck
    Dark horses work well for the Democratic Party.
    Barack Obama served in the US Senate on the

    Obama held assignments on the Senate Committees for Foreign Relations, Environment and Public Works and Veterans' Affairs through December 2006.[91] In January 2007, he left the Environment and Public Works committee and took additional assignments with Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.[92] He also became Chairman of the Senate's subcommittee on European Affairs.[93] As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Obama made official trips to Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Central Asia and Africa. He met with Mahmoud Abbas before Abbas became President of the Palestinian National Authority, and gave a speech at the University of Nairobi in which he condemned corruption within the Kenyan government.[94]

    Q:The last Democratic Dark Horse who won the presidency is whom?

    A: Noone.

  •  You must think J Castro is an idiot who (8+ / 0-)

    doesn't know what is good for his career and his sense of service. In your thinking he's just some lightweight how can be distracted with the shiny thing. Please. The guy didn't get to where he is without being very astute and self-aware.

    Further, affiant sayeth not. 53959

    by Gary Norton on Sun May 18, 2014 at 11:56:39 AM PDT

  •  absolutely terrible analysis (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    denton310, terranova108, wu ming, akeitz
    Would Hillary make a good president? Of course she would. ...
    Would she win? Probably not.
    Two incorrect statements. She's almost certain to win, but other than being somewhat less bad than a Republican I'm much less convinced of what we'd get.

    "Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war" - John Adams

    by esquimaux on Sun May 18, 2014 at 11:59:43 AM PDT

    •  Hillary would be a very strong candidate (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      davybaby, JamieG from Md

      1. She would not bring out more Republican voters than the anti-Obama vote.
      2. She would attract a lot of female Republicans (think Dubya's soccer mom coalition) who are not RWNJ crazy and would love to see a woman in the White House.
      3. She would bring blue to KY, AR, and possibly WV and AZ, without losing any of the states that Obama won. Heck, she even polls well in Texas, though I have not seen any recent polls there.
      4. Latest aggregate polls show her with near double-digit leads over potential Repug nominees:

  •  Not quite sure where the focus is (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nocynicism, akmk, grover, akeitz

    in this diary.  

    I voted 'Yes' in the poll:  If Julian Castro is at the top of our ticket, I'll vote for him without reservation.  

    If he is the vice presidential nominee on our ticket, I'm voting for him as well, no matter which of the now-discussed potential presidential aspirants are at the top of the ticket.  

    I like Julian Castro.  I consider him to have earned his rising star profile.  I consider him to be an outstanding public servant.  It would be my hope that he is in public service for a long, long time, as I believe he can do much, much good.  

    The Republicans would appear to disagree with you on Secretary of State Clinton.  They are absolutely beside themselves howling about Benghazi trying to subvert her chances.  Were her chances poor, the word 'Benghazi' would scarcely appear in mainstream media.  

    "How can we know the dancer from the dance?" (Yeats)

    by Remediator on Sun May 18, 2014 at 12:07:01 PM PDT

  •  Sorry (8+ / 0-)

    Can't help it.

    who's - whose
    loose - lose
    hair apparent - heir apparent

    That last misspelling is unintentionally hilarious, but should be used intentionally with respect to Rick Perry. Maybe Molly Ivins already beat us all to it years ago.

    "Step and fetch it" is a racist expression, and I also don't see how it makes any sense in the context you've used it. I'm assuming you think of Hillary Clinton as the "hair (sic) apparent;" but Castro is being appointed to HUD not by Clinton, but by Obama. In what sense will Castro be doing errands for Clinton?

    You also don't explain why a job at HUD precludes Castro from running for the nomination in a way that being mayor of a Texas city does not.

  •  Have to respectfully disagree (6+ / 0-)

    1) Castro has virtually no chance of winning the Dem nomination for President.  He just does not have the experience to be President as mayor of San Antonio.  He also does not have the name recognition that Obama had after his 2004 speech.
    2) Being HUD secretary provides him exposure to issues on a national scale giving him more gravitas.  It would be a good move for him, and its the only viable next step for him.  He can't run for Congress b/c his twin brother already has the seat.  Statewide office such as Senator or Governor is not really a likely possibility as Texas is still really red and will be for the near term.  
    3) Assuming his term as HUD secretary is successful, it makes him a viable VP candidate.  If picked and Hillary wins, he would obviously be the heir apparent.  
    This is Julian Castro's best political move if he wishes to seek Presidency.  

  •  "Sunglasses only worn by people who (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dave in AZ, akmk, grover, Paragryne, aimeehs

    have suffered traumatic brain injury..."

    -- says Karl Rove, about Secretary of State Clinton.  

    It's almost as if Karl was trying to undermine public perception of the presumptive Democratic frontrunner.  

    Which I'm sure Karl, himself nearly a morally angelic figure in the public arena, would never do.  

    Oh, and Karl, you did have a phone message.  Ohio called.  They added everything up again and still no more votes for Romney.  

    Karl would appear to be insulting HClinton's health in a push to remove her from serious contention for 2016.  And I don't think he'll succeed.

    I don't think he'd bother if she weren't a formidable opponent.  

    "Would [Hillary Clinton] win?  Probably not."   We disagree.  The question before Republicans is, "Is she likely to kick our asses?" and the answer is, "Yes."

    "How can we know the dancer from the dance?" (Yeats)

    by Remediator on Sun May 18, 2014 at 12:27:11 PM PDT

  •  Remember President Rudy Giuliani? (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VClib, grover, Paragryne, wu ming, akeitz

    Of course you don't. That's because Mayors don't make the jump from being city mayor to President, even NYC 9/11 mayor, let alone mayor of a second tier city like San Antonio. (No offense to San Antonions, I mean population-wise in saying '2nd tier city')

    So no, Castro's pick as HUD Secretary doesn't "get rid of him as a potential threat to Hillary Clinton's bid for the highest office." It elevates his status for possible runs for office down the road. Way down the road. I think many would question his qualification to be even V.P. in 2016.

    David Koch, a teacher and a Tea Partier sit down a table with a plate of a dozen cookies. Koch quickly stuffs 11 cookies in his pockets, leans to the bagger and says "watch out, the union thug will try to steal your cookie".

    by Dave in AZ on Sun May 18, 2014 at 12:33:52 PM PDT

  •  Sorry, but no. (5+ / 0-)

    Julian Castro does nothing to lower his own presidential chances by accepting a HUD position, especially since his chances as the mayor of San Antonio were exactly nil.

    I have other nits to pick with your diary, but they pale in comparison to a flawed thesis.

    No, you can't fix stupid. You OUTNUMBER stupid. -Wildthumb, 1/10/2013

    by newinfluence on Sun May 18, 2014 at 12:46:59 PM PDT

  •  I'm voting for O'Malley in the primaries. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    He's clearly running and he's the most progressive and most accomplished person running (even if Hillary runs).  During his term as Governor, the following got accomplished:

    1. DREAM Act passed
    2. Gay Marriage enacted
    3. Death Penalty repealed
    4. Gun Control passed
    5. Minimum wage increased
    6. Economy was above average during recession
    7. Income taxes on wealthy raised
    8. Increased education spending

    He's the best candidate running and if we have a real primary season, I think he can beat Hillary.

    But, whoever wins the nomination is getting my vote including Castro.

    President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

    by askew on Sun May 18, 2014 at 12:47:52 PM PDT

  •  O was a 'dark horse candidate.' (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dave in AZ, grover, wu ming, akeitz, aimeehs

    He was sitting in the US senate when that happened, after a respectable run in the state legislature. He had a resume that was not insubstantial, better than say Elizabeth Warren who is in her first electoral office no matter how much I like her. And now he is working to create other folk with more talent than the position they presently occupy can use, and less prospect than Chicago for moving up in the states they occupy. We may want Texas Blue but until it at least tries purple, Mayor Castro and his brother have only lilmited opportunities there.

    This appointment is how O gets a promising Latino pol a national reputation when the 2016 convention is going to be convulsed with I Love Hillary folk against  I Don't Love Hillary folk and all else will be lost in fog. It's one good way to get young Latinos known nationally and prepared to move forward on the national stage, particularly in a subject area in which Latinos and many others who are traditional D constituents have a substantial interest  And if he turns out to be lousy at HUD, then we didn't need a national election ala Paul Ryan to find that out. I don't see the problem.

  •  i think you've got it backwards (0+ / 0-)

    hillary would definitely win, but i'm not convinced she'd do a good job. bill clinton certainly didn't.

    •  Yeah -- the '90s sucked (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      davybaby, aimeehs

      That whole no-deficit, 22 million jobs stuff was overrated.

      •  NAFTA, telecom deregulation, welfare "reform" (0+ / 0-)

        repeal of the new deal restrictions on banks, the rise of the surveillance regime and "anti-terror" police state laws, expansion of the drug war, a fixation on deficits, neoliberal deregulation schemes, real estate bubbles, pushing shock doctrine abroad, setting up the iraq war, stocking the party establishment with cowardly DLC hacks, ditching unions to woo wall street soft money, etc.

        the bubble was fun while it lasted, but clinton basically conceded much of the reagan-bush policy into political consensus, while teeing up the bush admin.

  •  the 2016 (0+ / 0-)

    nominee will be a woman. If it's not, a Republican will enter the Oval Office in 2017.

    Women are the entire electoral margin. The "glass ceiling" of having  female nominee being shattered in 2008 was thwarted by Obama. Women aren't going to turn out in the numbers necessary to win in 2016 if that ceiling stays in tact yet again.

    "It's almost as if we're watching Mitt Romney on Safari in his own country." -- Jonathan Capeheart

    by JackND on Sun May 18, 2014 at 05:34:05 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site