First time voter questions

[Kirby]

Are all elections like this one? Mud slinging, demagogues, race baiting, fraud accusations, plumbers, preachers, hope, terrorists, abortion, and all the other senseless bullshit? I tried to keep up this election but the sheer amount of meaningless "issues" lost me. Is this what a democratic republic is all about? It seems that anyone who attends a convention, speech, or donates money to this mockery does nothing but add fuel to the fire. Can I look forward to this show every 4 years for the rest of my life?

Plato's philosopher king is beginning to sound like a good idea.

 

[techs]

I'm 52 and I can tell you prior to 2004 generally, no. Yet, since 2004 ALL elections have been like this.
So, I guess the future elections are up to how people like you react.

 

[GTKeeper]

This one, and the last one were particulalry bad. I don't think 2000 had as much mud slinging as these.

In the end, listen to the issues and solutions for issues, thats how I filter out all the bullshit.

 

[StageLeft]

To answer all your questions, yes. Although the last one I'm not sure it's a yes, since I am not sure you'll look forward to it, but it will happen.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: nkgreen
Are all elections like this one? Mud slinging, demagogues, race baiting, fraud accusations, plumbers, preachers, hope, terrorists, abortion, and all the other senseless bullshit? I tried to keep up this election but the sheer amount of meaningless "issues" lost me. Is this what a democratic republic is all about? It seems that anyone who attends a convention, speech, or donates money to this mockery does nothing but add fuel to the fire. Can I look forward to this show every 4 years for the rest of my life?

Plato's philosopher king is beginning to sound like a good idea.

Yes. It's the descending rule of politics. If you're opponent does something mean, you have to see his mean and raise him nasty. He then sees your nasty and raises you horrible.

Decent people will never get far in politics. Lincoln would've lost in today's politics.

 

[T2T III]

My observations over the years ...

Yes, mudslinging has been a part of things for quite a few years. Also, illegal techniques have been used (e.g. Nixon and Watergate). However, now, it has all taken on a much more angrier approach. It's very easy to sit behind a keyboard and criticize others for their beliefs - and belittle them. There's a lot of blogging going on to put "spin" on the activities - and, this is being done by both parties.

I'd be glad to debate and/or discuss any of these issues face to face. I don't feel the need to hide behind a keyboard.

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: nkgreen
Are all elections like this one? Mud slinging, demagogues, race baiting, fraud accusations, plumbers, preachers, hope, terrorists, abortion, and all the other senseless bullshit? I tried to keep up this election but the sheer amount of meaningless "issues" lost me. Is this what a democratic republic is all about? It seems that anyone who attends a convention, speech, or donates money to this mockery does nothing but add fuel to the fire. Can I look forward to this show every 4 years for the rest of my life?

Plato's philosopher king is beginning to sound like a good idea.

Yes, some worse, some better. All get very tough at the end.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: techs
I'm 52 and I can tell you prior to 2004 generally, no. Yet, since 2004 ALL elections have been like this.
So, I guess the future elections are up to how people like you react.

Internet?

 

[microbial]

Just lots more campaign surrogates (read: pundits and operatives) than before, along with lots more media outlets for their nefarious unethical behavior--which undoubtedly those surrogates believe lets their candidate off the hook, in terms being responsible for all the dirty work being done on their behalf.

In the end, I believe each presidential candidate is responsible for the general tone of their campaign. The ultimate in personal responsibility.

 

[Kirby]

It seems that candidates would rather tell you what you want to hear to get votes than to tell how they feel? How can one make a good, conscious decision about someone without knowing what their real opinions are?

Also, how many people have changed their mind about policy/candidates based off discussion? Or for that matter a bumper sticker or sign?

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: techs
I'm 52 and I can tell you prior to 2004 generally, no. Yet, since 2004 ALL elections have been like this.
So, I guess the future elections are up to how people like you react.

Internet?

That's a part of it. But if you read my quicky dying Derivatives thread thats a far better explanation. It's just so easy to find out what people hate the most and then motivate them to vote for it.

Here's the part that applies the most:

So what did it look like to Karl Rove in 2008?
Well, it would be much harder to piece together 50.1 percent of the vote, or 270 electoral votes but not impossible.
First off he had to make sure the one issue voters who were disgruntled came out to vote. You might be a strong 2nd amendment person, but if you were disenchanted with the Republicans you might not vote, etc, etc. So McCain would have to run the type of campaign that would highly motivate the one issue Republican voters. You don't do that by running towards the center and in any way treating your opponent like he's a good guy you just have some differences of opinion.
Hence, the type of campaign McCain has run.

 

[Kirby]

The "one issue" seems to be that the candidate is not the other one (or Bush). God (or FSM) forbid people actually like your stances, or for the candidates, can win with their stances. I don't think a Obama or McCain could win without the other, simply because they wouldn't have the other to compare themselves to.