Some marriage-equality trivia, more or less

Well done, New York. I’m still in Los Angeles (after our massive live-quiz debut here), en route soon to Boston soon (for the next Harvard Square show), but I’m missing my home state and very proud of it now. Yeah, in case you didn’t know, the BQT is a big ol’ lefty organization.

Some same-sex-marriage-related factoids:

As soon as Governor Cuomo signs the law (late July is the expected date), New York will become the sixth state of allow same-sex marriage. Any activist can rattle off the list: Massachusetts (May 17, 2004), Connecticut (November 12, 2008), Vermont (April 7, 2009), Iowa (April 27, 2009), New Hampshire (January 1, 2010), and now New York. It’s also on the books in Washington, D.C. (March 3, 2010), and, interestingly, the Coquille Indian Nation in Oregon (at least one member of the couple must be a member of the tribe, which numbers fewer than 600 people). Every little bit.

It was legal in my beloved California from June 16 to November 3, 2008. Various jurisdictions in a handful of other states permit it, but all told, even once NY becomes law, less than 12% of Americans live under a marriage-equality regime. It is a start, though. For more thorough—and more authoritative—information, check in with the hardworking folks at Marriage Equality USA. Or look at this lovable map:
But how does this relate to one of my—and the BQT’s—absolute favorite subjects, presidential trivia? Nate Silver shows the way: This terrific yet concise post on Five Thirty Eight details how Governor Cuomo’s leadership on this issue provides an interest contrast with President Obama’s attitude (or at least the public perception of it), and prompts the question: Cuomo in ’16?
Why not? Cuomo’s pop, who ruled Albany 1983–1994, was the constant subject of White House speculation, especially after he gave a rousing speech at the otherwise-moribund 1984 Democratic convention, and in ’92, he crept all the way up to the edge of jumping in. (Great Salon.com article here.) But for much of our nation’s history, the governor of New York was considered an automatic contender for the presidency. The tale of the tape:

Governors of New York who served as President: Four (Van Buren, Cleveland, both Roosevelts). No state has sent more chief executives to the big chair. (Virginia has had three, Tennessee and Ohio two, four others one each, unless you count pre-state military territories.)

Governors of New York who were unsuccessful major-party nominees for President: Six, including one who was picked two elections in a row (Federalist DeWitt Clinton, 1812; Democrat Horatio Seymour, 1868; Dem Samuel Tilden, 1876—won the popular vote even; Republican Charles Evans Hughes, 1916; Dem Al Smith, 1928; and Republican Thomas Dewey, 1944 and ‘48). I guess it's technically eight, since Van Buren and Cleveland were both unsuccessful nominees when they lost reelection, but you get the idea.

Governors of New York who were Vice President: Six (George Clinton—not him, of course; Daniel Tompkins—namesake of Tompinks Square Park; Van Buren; Levi Morton, who went to Albany after he was VP and had some bitchin' muttonchops…
…Theodore Roosevelt and Nelson Rockefeller. I could tell you whatever you wanted to know about those guys, just ask.)

So will Andrew run? Dude certainly seems ambitious enough, but 2016 is a couple zillion aeons away in political terms—had you heard of Barack Obama in 2003?—so it’s impossible to say with any degree of authority whatsoever. But this is unquestionably a check mark in the win column for him, and renewed assurance that maybe, possibly, politicians can still make good things happen.

Who won last Tuesday? Nepotism won.

Well, we've all had a few days to process that election. Fun fun.

But let's look at the aspects of the election that we can all agree on: trivia. Here in New York, we'll soon have a new governor, Andrew Cuomo. As you are doubtless aware, he is the son of a former governor, Mario Cuomo (in office 1983–1994). Hey, I voted for Andrew, and I like what I see from the guy, but I'm always a little skeptical of nepotism. I mean, what are the odds that the best guy for the job just happens to had his diaper changed by the boss?

Still, the Cuomos are far from alone; American politics—actually, politics everywhere—is extremely nepotistic. Makes me wonder if we should've just gotten ourselves a king after all (actually, we almost did). Some highlights:

— Ben Quayle, the 34-year-old son of the guy who's in a 20-way tie for the title of worst Vice President ever, just won the race to represent the third district of Arizona. Not that hard a trick, since it's a pretty bright red district, but Ben had some disadvantages: He attracted negative attention for running an ad in which he labeled Barack Obama "the worst President in history," in a stunningly poor understanding of American history; he also starred in a commercial with a couple little girls who he implied were his children (they're his nieces). Worst of all—to my mind—he announced his candidacy by having his dad declare it on Fox News. Ugh.

—Kentucky's getting itself a new senator, Rand "The Civil Rights Act Blows" Paul. An ophthalmologist, Paul had never run for office anymore, yet he managed to defeat both the Secretary of State and the Attorney General of Kentucky in order to win in this crazy, crazy year. Basically, the only reason he attracted any attention (at first) was because of his paternity: His dad is Texas Rep. Ron Paul, way too many Democrats' favorite Republican presidential candidates. This means that come January, we will have the rare occurrence of father and son have served in Congress simultaneously. (I wrongly tweeted the other day that this was the first time this was happening in 150 years, but I plum forgot about our national royalty, the Kennedys: The late Teddy's son Patrick has repped Rhode Island in the House since 1995.) Will Ron be jealous that his kid has a seat in a higher chamber? Does he secretly feel like he's smarter than his kid? How could he not, after seeing this:

—A silver lining of Tuesday night's results: Jerry Brown wins! All my life, I've loved California, and Governor Moonbeam is Mr. California: He was governor when I was born, later became mayor of Oakland and CA attorney general and secretary of state, and now he's going to be governor again, having crushed Madame Moneybags, who spent $140 million of her own dough on the race and now has jack to show for it (and I worry about eating $13 on a canceled bus ticket). Like many of you, I first heard of Brown when he ran for President in 1992, the first election I really paid attention to, and I've always loved this wacky guy. Besides, how could you not dig the subject of this song?

But he, too, is a beneficiary of daddy string-pulling: His dad, Edmund Gerald "Pat" Brown Sr. (yes, Jerry is Edmund Jr.), was gov from 1959 to '67. The only office holder between father and son's first term was your homeslice and mine, Ronald Reagan.

I suppose politics is no different from so many other lines of work in this world; after all, Donald Trump Jr. is an executive VP in his dad's company and is married to a supermodel. Every time I question my own career success, I consider how I did not enjoy these advantages, since my father is hardly Mr. Showbiz. I'm sure I would've had the inside track on being a pharmaceutical labor lawyer, but really, I don't think the shiny jackets would've fit in that line of work. Things happen the way they're supposed to.

By the way, this post has inspired me; expect a four-parter on father-son politicians in the BQT's near future. I promise.