Not much has gone well for Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann since she began her campaign for the Republican Party's presidential nomination earlier this year.
Virtually from the onset, her husband and close political collaborator, Marcus, was teased about being a closeted gay man, an idea which caught steam after it was revealed that he operated, in essence, a psychological clinic for self-hating homosexuals. After this, victory in a key Iowa straw poll was immediately overshadowed by Texas Governor Rick Perry's entrance into the race, an event which resulted in terrible developments for Michele, as he not only fractured and absorbed much of her support base, but also got the best of her emotionally in a televised debate over the ethics of providing preadolescent females with vaccinations to prevent cancer. As if all of this were not bad enough, influential figures within the Buckeye state's theo-conservative movement have actually encouraged her to drop out so another candidate, either Perry or former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, can receive the full support of fundamentalist Christian voters.
Watching cable news a few nights ago, I noticed her being interviewed by an awkward anchor who gently asked Bachmann if she would consider ending her run and endorse a more electable candidate. He was treating Iowa as if it were already a lost cause for her, and any possible win beyond that as improbability defined. She kept her cool and smiled, though it was plain to see that she was betraying her feelings on both counts. Instead of attacking the notion of quitting, however, she treated it as being totally out of the question. Why? Because, if memory serves, failure was simply not an option as far as she was concerned.
It is Bachmann's resilient can-do attitude and, I do believe, simplicity of heart that make her candidacy so outstanding. Though I feel that she is far too inexperienced and blinded by extreme religious beliefs to be a serious contender for the presidency, one thing she has been is consistent. Consistent in nauseating social policies, horrid campaign tactics, and, at times, bombastic rhetoric over simple facts? Absolutely. Nonetheless, she has a remarkable depth of knowledge about fiscal and national security matters alike. In that same interview, she likened herself to Margaret Thatcher; a strong-willed conservative woman capable of facing even the toughest governmental challenges before her. It is very sad to say that this could so easily be true if it were not for her critical deficits in understanding the dynamics of a secular society and fostering polished presentation skills.