Ms. Rachel Could Probably Run For President And Win

I'd donate. I feel like I owe her money anyway

Future president? / screenshot via Ms. Rachel’s channel, YouTube

It’s pretty well-trod territory that many American voters have some reservations with both major party political candidates for president. One of this year’s candidates is old, the other is old and batshit fucking insane and owes the state of New York half a billion dollars that he does not currently have and could possibly get from an international bad actor with bad intentions for how to wield that influence over said candidate. What a tough choice America faces! 

I don’t like to get political on this Substack– not because I don’t think politics are important, but because keeping up with the hell toward which America is headed and the handbasket that will bring us there is part of my job working for a company that trafficks mainly in political podcasts. Yes, political mechanisations are too important to ignore; and also, I’m fucking sick of politics. When I’m not working or getting into it with somebody with the lazy take of “both parties are the same, it doesn’t matter who you vote for,” I’d rather talk about pretty much anything else. 

But it’s impossible for me not to be perpetually annoyed by the fact that American politicians of all ages have a long track record of doing a piss poor job of meeting the needs of parents, or even appearing to be aware of what those needs are. Most male Senators give the impression that they’ve never changed a diaper; female elected officials are, on balance, so old that they haven’t had to arrange child care or figure out prenatal care this century— if they didn’t have servants or assistants who handled that for them. But the age issue doesn’t explain why just about every other goddamn country–most of which are also run by old people– has figured out basic things like guaranteed paid parental leave, universal childcare, a meaningful child tax credit, etc. 

Perhaps the solution is for more parents to run for office, but who has time? Who has the money? Who has the energy? A system that views childrearing as a “personal choice” rather than a public good with real, tangible, value is set up to drain parents at every turn— from the nonsensical mismatch of the end of the schoolday and the end of the work day to “return to office” mandates to the Thunderdome nightmare that is signing up for “summer camps” to a steady dwindling of public spaces where children are welcome. It boggles my mind that pregnant people don’t get special parking decals during the third trimester and in the first month after giving birth (who makes these laws?! People who have never been pregnant?!).

All of society benefits from the next generation being successfully raised from childhood to functional adulthood; there’s a huge disconnect in the fact that it does not seem to be the prevailing belief that it should be the collective responsibility of everybody — yes, including the “child-free” and those whose children have long ago grown to adults— to support the work involved in parenting, something that is literally necessary for the infrastructure we will all need in order to live as we age.

Many of my frustrations and anxieties as a parent are the result of structural failures on the part of the government, and so even when I’m as far away from politics as I could possibly be, mentally– usually when I’m playing with my kid– politics finds a way to creep in and take a dump. Why is this so much harder than it needs to be in one of the richest countries in the world? Why are we spending so much money juicing the share price of Boeing and SpaceX and so little on pro-natalist policies that benefit millions of parents versus dozens of shareholders.

Like I said, I can’t stop myself.

We watch a lot of Ms. Rachel in this house. I thought I’d be one of those no-screen parents, but that’s not realistic when there are times when my kid is home with me and I need to do something that isn’t directly interacting with her, like cooking dinner or getting any work done whatsoever. So sometimes Ms. Rachel babysits— or at least distracts.

The other day, it occurred to me that she should run for president.

Ms. Rachel, for those of you who don’t spend any time around very small children, is a music educator turned YouTube celebrity turned patron saint of parents who need their kids to leave them alone for a few minutes every once in a while. Her videos feature her and a small cast of expressive multiracial adults who sing and play games to camera. Her husband and production partner is a former Broadway conductor who has left the Great White Way to support his wife’s eponymous YouTube channel, in part, by manning a Small Orange Puppet. It is not a high-budget production; much of the segments are filmed in front of a green screen. Kids love her. Parents cherish her. I don’t know why her formula works so well, but it works.

(Case in point: I just had a Ms. Rachel New York Times profile up on my screen, and from across the room, my daughter recognized her pink headband and ponytail in the accompanying picture. She’s now demanding that we watch Ms. Rachel right now. I will oblige, because singing and dancing along to whatever video I pick will occupy her for at least the next ten minutes.)

But Ms. Rachel (aka Rachel Griffin Accurso), according to the above-referenced New York Times profile from last year, is not just some goofaround accidental Mr. Beast-Ballerina-Farm-style dumbfuck digital celebrity or empty vessel cosplaying fulfillment through domesticity— she’s got a masters degree in music education. Because she has a son who was speech delayed, she has a special interest in helping kids learn to speak using techniques utlized by speech language professionals. She researches her shows for weeks in advance. What the average layperson might see as a perky woman in overalls making eye contact with the camera while singing about icky sticky bubblegum is actually a rare find in this world of months-long pediatrician wait lists— she actually makes parents’ lives easier.

She’s Generation Alpha’s Mr. Rogers. I have yet to see anything negative about her. She was late to her Times interview because she kept stopping to take pictures with fans. Her TikTok account is refreshing and honest. She’s been known to stop and sing songs with kids who recognize her in public. She has tens of millions of subscribers and has made a small fortune on her videos. Good. If anybody deserves to have tens of millions of dollars, it’s Ms. Rachel. Here she is on Good Morning America, just exuding sweetness and light.

For added context, the children at the performance in this video (starting at around 3:45) have been sitting in that studio for longer than children that age prefer to do anything— live TV requires a lot of sitting around. And yet, during the performance, they are enraptured. Everybody’s happy. They are doing the toddler equivalent of rushing the stage. She’s their Beatles. She’s their their BTS. What Ms. Rachel has is more than regular run-of-the-mill charisma— she’s got the kind of charisma that can hold the attention of a two-year-old.

So here’s why I think she could run for president and win.

First, she has the means to do it and the ability to build out a donor base. She’s probably got enough YouTube ad money to set up her own Ms. Rachel School of Songs For Littles at NYU, but she’s also got an untapped resource at her fingertips: the parents whose lives she’s made better. Parents who are grateful for the ways that Ms. Rachel’s content has helped their children learn to speak or sing often joke on social media that they feel as though they owe her child support. Most of her tens of millions of followers and fans could spare $10, probably more. That get her the attention of the real big money donors, like Jeff Bezos’ cool ex wife Mackenzie Scott, who is just tooling around giving her billons away to deserving institutions while her penis-looking ex husband is attending space-themed galas with his tacky second wife.

Second, according to the Times profile, Ms. Rachel is religious, but not too religious— she and her husband met at a Unitarian Church. Voters who would have a difficult time putting an agnostic in the White House would be assuaged, as would voters who are tired of terrified, hateful religious zealots controlling the government.

Third, she’s steadfastly humane. One of the cast members of Ms. Rachel is a nonbinary performer named Jules who goes by they/them pronouns, and when a bunch of bigots tried to get Jules canceled, Ms. Rachel refused to budge. She seems to hate bullies and has spoken out against book bans and in favor of public libraries.

Fourth, she’s just as qualified to work in the federal government as anybody else who is a quick study and cares about getting things right. Many rank-and-file executive branch staffers hired after the turn of an administration have little specific qualifications for the positions for which they’re hired beyond working on a winning political campaign. Nobody serious believes that the president of the US is making all of their decisions unilaterally; they rely on advisors, and to select a president is to select a person who has a proven track record of surrounding themselves with smart people.

I’m not saying that Ms. Rachel should run for president this late in the campaign season. The last thing I need to see is the oppo file on her; if there’s anything bad about her out there, I don’t want to know about it.

But maybe she should think about it next time around. Maybe if somebody like here were closer to the levers of power, life for American parents would suck a little less.

Apologies for the late newsletter dispatch— you’ll get an extra newsletter in your inbox by the end of the workweek to make up for it. Not to be cryptic, but a lot of stuff is going on, and none of it is good! Once it’s all behind me, I’ll be able to say more, but for now, I’m here, and I’m doing my best.