- Who are the people who change their minds about the candidates after viewing/reading/seeing/hearing the information presented through the media?
- Holy crap. I'm one of the people that both parties are hoping to influence.
I've long considered myself an independent. Not as a cop-out as I'm often accused -- "Make up your mind!" or, "You just don't want to make a decision." And not so I can avoid having to explain the behaviors of people I align myself over which I have no control. I know Republicans shuddered when they heard about Cheney shooting his hunting buddy, and Democrats cringed when Clinton had his non-sexual relations. (Okay, okay - I am glad that I get to dodge that.)
I consider myself an independent because I find that neither major party has really expressed the values I hold important consistently. I've found I'm more comfortable taking a look at the issues, voting history and how a candidate has shown they make their decisions, and for what they stand -- for each position I feel informed enough to vote.
Which brings me back to my two thoughts. Watching the DNC and RNC I see rabid supporters of both parties (or perhaps just those candidates, those people), the ones that will vote that party. Period. I also find that as an undecided voter, I get very little out of the national conventions. Both parties tend to stand up and give honor to their opponent with the one hand, and try to bash them with the other. I find that I have more appreciation for the party that ends up doing the least bashing, and most genuine honoring. All the other rhetoric seems steeped in emotional ordnance prepared for the group that's fanatical enough to be at the convention - it's not geared to inform and influence an independent with reason.
As I've realized that all those political commercials, approved by those candidates, are really designed to get me to NOT vote for the other guy (or gal), I've also realized that it's hard work and not easy to sift through all the chaff for the real determinants of what a Person, in the Office, will do for the People, and the Country. But it's also something that I realize I really have the responsibility to do.
So I'm doing my best, to watch both sides, and take all the bashing with a grain of salt, to only look at the side show of whose pastor said what, or whose daughter got pregnant to see how the Person running handles it and shows their character. And I certainly hope that these candidates will start talking about what they will do, and how they will do it.
Posts
11 comments:
Amen.
One more thing to consider: how does the candidate make a decision. On my mind lately: McCain selected Palin, apparently without investigating (at least at any depth) the accusation that she fired the head of the Alaska state police for not firing her former brother-in-law. Leaving aside for the moment the question of whether the accusation is true, what does this say about McCain's decision-making process? We've already seen what happens when a president makes decisions based on his gut, and I'm not liking it so much.
doug
I'm in total agreement here.
So let's look at Obama. The person that he starts his political career with, well at his house, is a terrorist that has set multiple bombs killing multiple people, and is he sorry, no all he says is he wishs he would have done more. Hmmm smart idea? How about the person that borrows money from terrorists to help Obama buy his house. Smart idea? (a move that he now admits was "bone-headed") How about a tax plan that would tax people making 42K a year up to 50%. Let's tax businesses so they raise the prices on their goods and get passed on to all of us. "Iran is a small country and doesn't pose a threat." hmm I am sure I heard that somewhere. The fact that he doesn't know who has veto power in NATO.
Now back to Sara Palin, she might have fired the chief because he wouldn't fire an officer who was drunk on duty and tased his 10 year old kid, sith his issued taser. Good for her.
Bill
"As I've realized that all those political commercials, approved by those candidates, are really designed to get me to NOT vote for the other guy (or gal), I've also realized that it's hard work and not easy to sift through all the chaff for the real determinants of what a Person, in the Office, will do for the People, and the Country. But it's also something that I realize I really have the responsibility to do."
Couldn't have said it better. As someone that wishes that I could vote "none of the above" or "Kick them all out and start over."
-Bill
Bill,
I'm not sure I understand much of your first comment - do you have resources for that information?
I wasn't sure if you were talking about a possible increase in the capital gains tax mentioned by Chris Wallace. I am using FactCheck.org to find out the truth behind statements from BOTH sides. Here's something I found related to that statement:
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/would_raising_the_capital_gains_tax_rate.html
"[...] Obama's proposal exempts all making under $250,000 a year from paying any increase in the capital gains rate[...]"
Though I AM interested to read good sources for the comments you make.
Bill,
On your second comment, do you remember the Richard Pryor movie, "Brewster's Millions"? He ran for office under, "None of the Above," and ended up winning - meaning they had to start over! I think it's always resonated with people!
First person is Bill Ayers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Ayers . He was the head of Weather Underground back in the 60's and 70's. He and his group set off two bombs in the US. Second is Tony Rezko http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Rezko
Now I know wiki isn't the end all be all. But I can look up the info for you.
His tax increases. He is purposing 1 Trillion dollars of new spending where do people think it is going to come from. The business taxes would be added to any small business making over $250k as well. When those taxes go up they won't be able to hire people. Causing the unemployement to go up. Also it would drive up the price on goods, so it is a tax on us. People don't realize that businesses don't pay taxes. They pass those wonderful increases on to us. All of the prices that you pay for food, to gas, to clothes would all increase. Also if you look historically when you drive up prices on domestic goods the imported goods sales rise, due to their prices aren't affected, unless you raise the taxes on them (which is pasted on to us). Right now there, on ave., is 150 different taxes on a loaf of bread.
Obama didn't know that Russia has veto power in the UN. After he found out he changed his stance on Russia-Gorgia conflict.
When first asked about Iran he said it was a small coutry that was NOT a threat.
Currently the top 5% of the country pay 90% of the taxes. The top 10% pay 95%.
Remember when he says that anyone under $250k won't pay taxes, that is just income taxes.
Also remember who is in control of the House and Senate. And what have they done. Is there a balanced budget? Has there been one bill to get us out of Iraq? Is the free-flow of drugs and gang bangers coming across our southern boarder stopped?
The congress before that did almost next to nothing.
-B
As a side note I am upset that Palin (which as the head of the Executive branch of Alaska is within her right) didn't fire he child abusing ex-brother-in-law, who is still on the job.
http://rightchange.com/issue_tax1.php
just a different look.
-B
Interesting information! I've only had a chance to read some of the information about Ayers, but did come across what I thought was a balanced perspective here:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/oped/chi-oped0504chapmanmay04,0,3136852.column
Where Steve Chapman poses that while Obama should clarify his relationship with Ayers, McCain should do the same with his relationship with G. Gordon Liddy.
But I disagree - all of us have those in our lives that have different ideologies, morals, histories - and trying to put more importance on -one- of Them, over the sum value of The Person themselves, devalues The Person. What -I- think, philosophize and -do- is not what a teacher, or coach, or committee member, or even opponent programmed me to be. That I take pieces and parts and thoughts and impressions and ideas away from every contact can't be denied. But it's what I -do- with them that becomes important.
Should we worry that Ayers had more influence than Obama's mother, family and close friends? Should we worry that McCain thinks that Liddy's "principals and philosophies [...] keep our nation great?"(ibid.)
My perspective is that neither of these rather peripheral relationships should be of much consequence to the race. I highly doubt that either candidate spent time with these people, sharing political debate, and forming with them, or basing on them, their philosophical, ethical or moral models. I find it much more pertinent to consider what their documented plans will mean for us.
And to that point, thanks for the good stuff, I'll keep digging and learning! (I think I'm gonna write a post about some of this stuff - it's thought-provoking...)
The thing that I don't like about their documented plans is that they are politicians. ie they lie for a living.
So I do look mainly at what they have done in the past to make up my mind. Who they keep as friends and mentors. What they have said, how they have voted, etc.
Even though I am ragging on Obama I don't think that McCain is really any better.
I don't think either has put out an accual plan that is any where near where this country needs to go, or should I say where I think and feel it should go.
So what I am left with is who will do the best job for my family. Also who will the least damage to the country.
Post a Comment