...
Anyway, I think in the main, the qualified, honest, articulate, smart individuals get swamped out.
My family is still in the early stages of this, but there are a few things I've observed. (1) Name recognition matters; (2) ability to fundraise matters (and many people determine whether someone is worth supporting based on whether they are capable fundraisers); (3) convincing taste makers to support you matters a lot (and this includes the local interest groups).
Some other things that are useful:
(A) independent wealth. There's a reason a lot of independently wealthy people are involved in politics: you need the time to dedicate to it without making any money, and it's sure useful to be able to kick in a bunch of your own money to jump start any campaign. I probably list this one first because we don't have it. We're comfortable, but not like a lot of the people who get into higher politics. But even from where we sit, SFIrish wouldn't be able to do what she's doing if I couldn't pay our bills on my salary.
(B) Articulate/Charismatic: people like voting for people who are "likable," which really means charismatic.
(C) Hard public policy work: numbers 1 and 3, above, often come about as a result of digging into public policy work in your locale. Working in government, including in the policy realm, is different from talking about politics. They are related, but plenty of people are capable of talking policy who aren't capable of making it.
(D) Attractive.
(E) Capable of dealing with a great deal of criticism and anger without letting it get to you. This is a part of public policy work that most people probably aren't accustomed to. Virtually any decision (from minimum wage, marijuana dispensaries, and property rights on the one hand, to tree removal and barking dogs on the other) generates ill will and animosity. And it shouldn't come as a surprise that more people reach out to their elected officials when they are angry than when they aren't. I think the ratio is probably about 100-1.
Our experience so far is that the local interest groups care about your record more than your rhetoric, and that there are plenty of people who work in those groups who value integrity more than following their directions on everything (though you will rarely get support from a group that you basically disagree with; shocking, I know).
And luck matters, too.
I suspect a great many more of the people in public office are qualified, honest, articulate, and smart--as well as financially secure, attractive, and lucky--than many people think. But there are some awfully crooked ones (as there are in any center of power), and they sure give a bad rap to the rest.
