Critique the Candidates

Personally, I think Palin was a weak choice. Her voice also reminds me of the mom from Bobby's World, dontcha know.

As for Presidential Candidates, I'm leaning more towards Obama. He seems more genuine to me. Something isn't sitting right with me and McCain... I just don't trust him.

 

What is a Hockey Mom? and why would you define yourself by what sport your kids play? :noidea:

 

All of the speeches (which, I understand there have only been a few) have sounded exactly the same. She speaks of this Hockey mom blah, and then she speaks of how her parents are both elementary teachers, while always finding time to throw in a little something about her children with the weird names... She isn't bringing anything to the table. She keeps talking about the change she is going to help bring once the Republicans are in Washington... but isn't speaking of this actual change. I guess we're all supposed to be pumped about surprises.

The same with McCain... at the Republican Convention, it seemed like they were all fired up about roasting Obama over explaining what they're going to do for the economy. Okay, we get it... but this isn't Middle School.

 

The equivilent of the Republican party in my country is doing something similar, trying to be all things to all people without actually revealing their true agenda because they don't want to scare off borderline or moderate voters. I like politicians to be upfront about about their intentions/policies.

 

Are you kidding me? Have you been paying attention to politics in the last decade (at least!)? I'm sure it's been longer than a decade, but I can only speak back about what I remember since I've been old enough to pay attention to it. Every politician I've ever seen has their substanceless slogans. I could go through the many ways our country is doomed unless something drastic happens (hell, there's one example of it already from this thread), but in short I've lost so much hope that I can't even begin to care whether McCain or Obama gets elected.

 

Well, I guess you have good reason not to have any hope anymore if people aren't going to care anymore. I'd start thinking the world was doomed, too.

 

This is the kind of thing I'm talking about, actually. What is "care"? The average person in the US says that if you don't vote or "get involved" in politics, then you're "not patriotic" or just don't care, as if it were such a bad thing.

The problem is that people in this country are brainwashed, or as close to it as you can come to that on a mass scale. I said I'd seen some of the reason for our political downfall in this thread already--I didn't lie. The "either/or" mentality about the two parties is killing us. Last year I mentioned in a political discussion that I'm probably gonna vote third party just because I can't stand the two main ones at all, and one girl (an SJ... go figure) goes "why would you do that? You know they're never gonna win, so why wouldn't you vote for the one of the two you find better?"

This is the first reason our country is done for, in my opinion. No one besides Republicans or Democrats will ever take office because there are too many deluded people who "care." They pad the vote so that no one except those who must be nominated by those who run the two parties even has a chance.

But, of course, that's only a problem if the two major parties are bad for the country in the first place. I think that they are. Ignoring the faults and lies of the individuals who get elected, the parties practically run the government more than the individuals. Politics and elections are mostly showbusiness anyway--grab some good speakers who the people will trust and make them say whatever they can to get the middle voters. Every time you hear a negative ad on tv talking about how one person flip-flopped from what they said back 8 or 9 months ago? That's because they say whatever they can to sound like "the archetype of their party" during primaries, because only the hardcore members of them will vote... then switch their strategy to appeal to the middle ground in the actual election. Why would you sound like the most hardcore Republican if the most hardcore Republicans will vote for you just because you're not a Democrat? No, you have to appeal to the people who could vote either way, and that creates contradictions. I don't care how good you are, nobody can stay consistent when the set of views they voice isn't their own.

The reason I say the parties control the candidates is because you physically can't get "that far" towards the presidency unless you're someone they think can win. The primary goal of both parties is simply to get into office. Sure they may say (and may even think themselves) that they're doing the best thing for their country, but the policies say otherwise. Sometime if you get the chance, look up gerrymandering hall of fame on google. It shows pictures of "districts" that were set up by state goverenments in order to remain in power. With the aid of computers they can divide up different sides of the street based on whether the members usually vote Rep. or Dem. and virtually ensure that they keep control of most of their districts. In some cases they made a district follow interstate highways because a law was passed stating that districts "must be continuous" (I've little doubt that was for appearances because people were pissed off about it) and they wanted to link two neighborhoods together without hitting any of the houses in between.

Even beyond that, look at the "winner take all" system within states for electoral votes and (set by the state government, of course) within districts for Representatives. If that does nothing else, it almost certainly prevents a third party from entering office. Occasionally you may get a rogue representative into the house who's independent or third party... but it's rare, and clearly out of the question for the presidency. If they don't care about staying in power, why not enact something like proportional representation so that someone else has a chance? The answer (I think) goes back to that girl I mentioned earlier. If there weren't people thinking "which one of these two do I want to elect this time?" every time there's an election, there'd be a far better chance of having a government that actually represents a large number of views, rather than just two different parties who basically represent the same one. If PR got set in place, people wouldn't be in the mental captivity that they are now, tricked (or perhaps not tricked, since there's a large element of truth in it... but at least believing) that no one else has a chance.

And then the media... oooh how much the media sucks. Fox takes a lot of crap for spouting Republican propaganda... but it's only because the majority of people are Democrats. You'd be foolish not to think that CNN and NBC aren't spouting their own brands of propaganda just as much. They just don't get pinned for it because most of the population agrees with them--in other words, they've done a better job by getting away with it. Evidence for the claim? If you were watching the debates during the nominations, (at the risk of sounding like one of those internet fan boys) take a look at Ron Paul. That guy may be the only politician I've ever seen who refuses to play the game. Regardless of what you think about his views, I heard him talk and for the first time ever I actually got the impression that there was a politician who had his own views. It's tougher to see in debates, but they held an interview with him up in New Hampshire for an hour where they actually let him explain himself, and he was actually smart, supporting things that had substance to them and actually having an answer when someone asked "why?" I read once that he had committed virtually every act of political suicide that you could, and still managed to stay in office. But think about it... and if your knee jerk reaction was "that guy was crazy" or "just an internet fad," you're basically proving my point for me. The popular news stations... in fact I think all of them... made him out to look crazy. This is tougher to argue to an F crowd, but they discredited him by making it look like he had no chance (and I'm not even saying he did, but they made it look like that) almost immediately after he decided to run. Then the debates... if you watched any of them, they were just simply disrespectful to him. Why? I'm not sure... but I've got a sneaking suspicion it has to do with the fact that he wasn't so tied to the party with which he was running--he would have done his own thing (like he did as a Representative) instead of compromising like anyone who actually has a chance of winning.

So that's why I don't hold out hope. People are hopelessly ensnared by the idea that nobody outside of the two main parties can win--which, in a democratic system, is a self-fulfilling prophecy. The policies enacted by the two parties, most notably the winner-take-all system, deny the possibility of anyone else getting into office. The people the two parties elect, in the meantime, are untrustable and work almost entirely by compromise. And finally there's the media--yes, all of the media--who can back them up and discredit anybody who wouldn't work with them. This is a short list of the reasons why I have no hope for the country. It's getting too long to continue, but I didn't even get to the shameful "chipping away" of freedoms that comes from interpreting the Constitution while ignoring authorial intent, or some of the more horrifying policies that have the appearance of helping people while in fact handicapping them for the benefit of a larger number of voters (can anyone say minimum wage?). I get the feeling it's already so long that few people will actually read this, though, so I'll cut it off here and come back if anyone cares. My point being this, though: it's not that I don't care that saps my hope... it's the people who care indiscriminately who do that.

 

I like australias 5 party system, open to any party that wants to run, but only 5 really stand a chance...

 

But you're only assuming that everyone who has posted in this thread titled "Critique the Candidates" hasn't thought of any parties other than Republican or Democratic. I think you bring a good argument, but only one that isn't fully thought out. You are looking for the debate, but are bringing a very unthought out side.

I say vote for who you want to vote for, care, have hope. But vote. If society is brainwashed to vote Republican or democratic (which I do agree with, I never noted myself delegated to any set party), then VOTE for your chosen party, and get them on the board. What is stopping people from voting for their less known parties? Mostly the idea that they would never win anyway.

Honestly, in my whole hearted opinion, Obama seems like he has a good head on his shoulders. I am completely aware of the games that media play. INFJ's aren't easily swayed and are skeptical of who they take on. You can't just assume that someone who likes a candidate who is republican or democratic, or someone who is more of a main focus on television, is only being voted for for those reasons. You need to look at the bigger picture (Green party, democracti, republican, etc,) and set all of the silly rumours, media titles/stories, and everything trying to sidetrack you aside. That is the only way you're going to be able to make a decision on your own.

I had a discussion with a female today about Obama. She said he wasn't black at all. (He is 1/2 black). She said he was a hardcore muslim. (His father practiced the religion of muslim, but also left the family and had only seen Obama a handful of times). And these are things people don't think of. What was in paranthesis is not what the media is trying to get out there.

You have to learn how to think with your own head, and you have to be able to say "I'm going to choose the candidate who will best serve our country." You can't just not vote republican or democractic because these are the main parties. You can't not vote for a lesser known party just because they are a lesser known party. And you can't assume someone is voting for a more popular party just because it is a more popular party. (I use the term "can't" losely, because obviously to each their own, and if those people are going to make shallow choices, then be prepared to be doomed for the next 4 years).

I view candidates as individuals, not the party name they hold. That is going to be your best bet. But please don't assume that all of us are brain washed and that is why we choose or candidates. Personally, if I was on the verge of losing hope, it would be because of people who choose to go against the majority, just because its going against the majority. That can bring as much failure as the majority as a whole. (I'm not saying this is what you were suggesting about yourself, but by the way you assumed, this is just where my direction headed).

If you can't think like an individual, that is what is going to kill us. Not voting for someone you truely believe to have potential in office.

 

Also, please keep in mind that I'm very awful at putting lots of words together to make sense. Hopefully it did make enough sense

And I'm no political guru, but I've been trying to keep up with the parties this time around in order to make an adequate enough decision so my little vote may or may not matter.

(Which is another thing that bothers me. People who don't vote because they think their "vote doesn't matter". It always matters. Because every person who says their vote doesn't matter adds up, thus creating a bigger infliction towards the party you would want to vote for. You might as well do your part. And if person believes that our votes don't matter as a whole, which isn't a known fact, I'd rather have my vote in the pot, just in case, rather than not having it in the pot at all).

 

Well...I don't know about everybody... I just said there was an example of people thinking "one candidate or the other" in this thread. Maybe that's an assumption... but assumptions don't usually have reason behind them. In this case I was going by...

If that's not "not McCain... therefore Obama," I don't know what is. "I don't like this guy, so I'm going to vote for the other." Whether it's brainwashing by the media or from some other source I can't know... but at least in text that's what it looked like to me.

Otherwise, I wish I could get out the rest of my political rant--I picked the about 1/3 or so of the most-relevant-to-the-election information because it sounded like you thought hopelessness was justified just because I didn't care... yugh! I think the only reason it sounds poorly thought out is because politicians, economic ideas, foreign policy, and recent (<50 years) loss of freedom are so congealed together in my mind that they're inseparable from the inevitable downfall of this country... or at least all it started out to be. Explaining the rest would be well off topic from the candidates, and sadly require way more motivation than I have right now. Sufffice to say that "the candidates" (maybe satya could chime in and tell us if he was honestly thinking about anyone besides McCain and Obama when he made this thread? I honestly don't know and am not trying to be antagonistic, but I kind of doubt it just by playing probability) kind of make me sick... I don't think we're truly any better off with one than the other.

 

Maybe that is what it sounded like to you, but I was stating that McCain doesn't seem like he is going to be doing much for the country, other than introducing us to another Bush term. Obama, I feel, will bring a breath of fresh air (this feeling being brought on by what I have viewed of his campaign and what he has stated he is willing to do, and where his priorities lie). I have noticed McCain does not have what I am looking for for President. But I am still going to look into it. I am also going to continue looking into Obama. The other candidates don't interest me and this has nothing to do with the media. I thought I put out that point in a decent manner.

Either way, I don't talk politics, and I've done enough of that so far in this thread. I just came into this thread to discuss Palin and her obnoxious voice and her irrelevant speeches. I just wanted to point out that assuming is just as bad as any brainwashing.

I believe that everyone has their own opinions. I am just saying that I hope you choose who you want, and do not avoid voting just because you don't think your candidate won't win. And don't nag on other people when they vote for Republican or Democratic, because there is a high chance that they just think those parties may be the best for the country. Then, we just keep our fingers crossed that the majority voted for what best suits us.

 

If Europe voted it would be something like 90% Obama :nod:

Also, having too many candidates here participated in Le Pen (extreme right, xenophobe) getting in the second round of the presidential elections here in France a few years ago. Our system takes the two biggest scores of the first round into the second round, and usually it's always the same parties. People voted for all the small left wing candidates to "protest" against the messy socialists, who ended up not getting enough votes. Result : we had to choose between right and extreme right.

This said, it is good in general for smaller parties to be able to be heard.

 

whoops... I think I went too far. Sorry 'bout that.

 

Well said, Satya, on the assuming part, and on providing more than your feelings on the matter.
I'm bad with facts. But that is one that would have been good to throw out there, and one of his good aspects.

 

I think we were both struggling to get our points across to each other. We were just two people having a conversation