THE WAGES OF HATRED: Remarkably, Herschel Walker could win!

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 11, 2022

Should Jemele Hill feel "insulted?" Should Jemele Hill feel insulted by the fact that Herschel Walker is running for the Senate in Georgia—and that he may actually win?

There are no obvious rules for such things. Hill reported her reaction in a recent essay for The Atlantic which appeared beneath these headlines:

Herschel Walker’s Candidacy Is Just Insulting
The contrast with his opponent renders it all the more egregious.

For ourselves, we think that Hill may be "taking the bait" in broadcasting this reaction. That said, it isn't hard to see why Hill, and many others, are perhaps bit gobsmacked by the fact that Walker won nomination as the Republican candidate for this Senate seat.

Walker is a highly unusual candidate. And no, it doesn't just appear that way to members of the blue tribe. 

Bret Stephens is a center-right / conservative journalist of long standing. Below, you see the way he describes Walker in today's New York Times. The excerpt is drawn from his weekly "Conversation" with his center-left colleague, Gail Collins:

Bret: ...Democrats have to show they’re serious about border security. But, speaking about unseriousness, can we talk about Herschel Walker?

Gail: I know I’m acknowledging a character defect but I love to talk about Herschel Walker.

Bret: He’s so absolutely awful, so completely catastrophic, so epically embarrassing, so hilariously hypocritical, so incandescently idiotic, so stratospherically scandalous, so volcanically vomitous, that he may actually serve a purpose.

Gail: Go on, go on!

Bret: Walker’s revelatory candidacy is to today’s G.O.P. what the odor of rancid chicken is to the chicken itself: It warns you to steer clear. 

In a minor bit of dumbnification, the Times publishes the transcript of this weekly exchange on a strictly first-name basis, with plenty of jokes and humorous wordplay larded in besides. But there you see the way the Walker candidacy strikes a major figure from the center-right, albeit one who has been NeverTrump. 

It's "rancid chicken," Stephens declares. The discussion continued from there:

Bret: Walker’s revelatory candidacy is to today’s G.O.P. what the odor of rancid chicken is to the chicken itself: It warns you to steer clear. This should have been the Republican’s race to lose, simply because Georgia still elects conservatives, it’s a midterm election, the Republican governor is probably going to be re-elected, and there’s an unpopular Democratic incumbent in the White House. Instead, Walker’s candidacy looks like a cross between the Atlanta Falcons in the 2017 Super Bowl, squandering a 28-3 lead, and Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, minus the finesse.

Ugh. Now watch him win.

After savaging Walker's "rancid chicken" candidacy, Stephens comes to terms with reality, noting that Walker may win.

Assessed by traditional standards, Walker would quite possibly be the least qualified person ever elected to the Senate. 

We aren't referring to the jumbled, occasionally violent personal life on which our tribe is currently focused. We're referring to his manifest lack of preparation in the area political analysts used to describe as "the issues."

For the record, there's no requirement that Walker, or anyone else in American life, should understand basic policy issues. In truth, no one fully understands the full complement of policy issues, and very few people understand even one such issue well.

That said, most people don't run for the United States Senate, and that's what Walker is doing. His attempts to discuss some basic issues have ended in the kinds of disaster Hill describes in her essay:

HILL (10/7/22): Walker has also shown on numerous occasions that he lacks any real grasp of policy issues. At a campaign event this summer, Walker blamed China for corrupting America’s air supply. “Do you know we don’t control this air?” Walker told the audience. “No matter how much money we put in controlling our air, it goes over to China or to somewhere else, and it messes it up. All of a sudden, it comes back over here. All we’re doing is spending money.”

Some of Walker’s completely unintelligible answers to basic questions would be amusing if the Georgia Senate race weren’t so important. His victory could help tip control of the Senate to Republicans, creating ripple effects across the country—potentially including legislation to ban abortion nationwide.

This foolishness would be amusing if it didn't matter, Hill says. But rather plainly, it does matter. Gail and Bret labor on:

Gail: Well, he’d be voting with your side in the Senate. That wouldn’t make it worth something?

Bret: My side? Noooooooooo. As the old Polish proverb has it: “Not my circus, not my monkeys.” It’s really a shame because the country could really use a serious conservative party right now.

If elected, Walker will be voting with the GOP. Stephens seems to feel that that fact lies at the heart of the problem.

Judged by traditional standards and norms, Walker is an astonishingly unprepared / unqualified candidate. In saying this, we're setting his personal life to the side. We're considering only one thing—his apparent ability to add to the public debate as he assesses key issues.

Judged by traditional standards and norms, Walker is an astonishing candidate. Despite this fact, he's running neck-and-neck in Georgia with the incumbent senator, Raphael Warnock—and he could easily win.

Millions of people in the Peach State are going to vote for Walker. Control of the Senate (such as it is) may turn on the outcome of this Georgia race.

Jemele Hill is a good, decent person. There's absolutely nothing even dimly wrong with her smarts. Having noted those facts, we close to say by posing a question:

There are no rules for such things, but is it helpful for her to say she feels "insulted" by this state of affairs? More to the point:

When we liberals react in similar ways, is it even dimly possible that we're helping Walker win?

As we noted yesterday, David French has recently offered some good, sound advice: Intense political hatred can make fools of us all, he said. 

Jemele Hill isn't anything close to being a fool, and no, she isn't a hater. But then again, we're all just human, every single one.

Tomorrow: Can millions of Georgians be wrong?