Is William Taft a more random choice for the 5th racing president? Who here, prior to today, would have even named Taft as a short-list candidate?
Aside from the fact that, last time I checked, there was still only four presidents on Mt. Rushmore, did we really need a 5th racing president? Does this mean we’ll be introducing a new president every few years from now on? Does this mean that eventually we’ll have a dozen charicatures of former statesman “racing” to the finish line (inexplicably greeted by a giant felt Lizard, to pay homage to the ever present commercialism rampant in today’s game)?
I will say that after reading Dan Steinberg’s article in the Saturday Washington Post, that I understand the selection a bit more. I fully admit that I had no recollection of Taft’s presidency in general, nor did I remember that he and Teddy Roosevelt had a massive argument (which of course is now ripe for mocking during every race), nor that Taft is apparently responsible for both throwing out the first pitch and (by urban legend) establishing the 7th inning stretch. I’m a bit more on-board now.
However, had I known that making a change was in the works, I think I would have gone in a different direction. I would have either selected arguably the last remaining inarguable “great” president this country has had (Franklin Roosevelt), or I would have dumped all four of our existing presidents and simply created characatures of the last four sitting presidents to do the racing. Imagine a race with Barack Obama, the younger George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and the older George Bush. How funny could that be? On a nightly basis you could have each president’s predecessor messing with his successor, or you could play off of each president’s nuances. There’s equal balance between Republicans and Democrats here, and I’m sure that W. wouldn’t mind being the “Teddy Roosevelt” lovable loser of the group