[awcopus]

Anyone else out there just exhausted by the lack of honesty or depth in political debates? It's exhausting to me to hear individuals making affirmative claims in favor of Bush or Kerry when neither of them has established a particularly admirable record.

I'm in my early thirties and all I've seen in state and national politics is a steady growth in the expense and encroachment of government in people's personal and economic affairs resulting from the policies of both major parties.

This election is being covered as a sequel to the last election, with media emphasizing the "story" of democrats organizing to do whatever it takes to remove Bush.... as if the consequences of the policies of either party will result in anything different from a continued growth of government power at the expense of private wealth, personal freedoms, et cetera.

Do you share these concerns?

[ghost_flash]

Originally posted by awcopus:
Anyone else out there just exhausted by the lack of honesty or depth in political debates? It's exhausting to me to hear individuals making affirmative claims in favor of Bush or Kerry when neither of them has established a particularly admirable record.

I'm in my early thirties and all I've seen in state and national politics is a steady growth in the expense and encroachment of government in people's personal and economic affairs resulting from the policies of both major parties.

This election is being covered as a sequel to the last election, with media emphasizing the "story" of democrats organizing to do whatever it takes to remove Bush.... as if the consequences of the policies of either party will result in anything different from a continued growth of government power at the expense of private wealth, personal freedoms, et cetera.

Do you share these concerns?

I don't feel a bit...........what? I don't feel a bit.....................as I was saying, I

[zigzag]

I share your concerns but my experience is that it has always been this way and always will be. If that makes me cynical, so be it - I simply regard it as realistic.

The only thing that surprises me is that, year after year, decade after decade, no matter how often they are lied to by both sides, people who should know better continue to buy into the rhetoric. Like second marriages, it appears to be a triumph of hope over experience.

The other remarkable thing, as these boards demonstrate all too well, is that people who should know better persist in arguing that their party is more virtuous than the other, i.e. that it's the other side that lies, plays dirty tricks, manipulates the media, uses profanity, etc. I find this idea comical and hopelessly naive, but it appears to be an aspect of human nature. What these people don't realize is that the very politicians they're so loyal to regard them as gullible sheep. Indeed, they count on it - they know that it's mostly make-believe and that they just have to sell it.

I think every citizen should be required to spend a week working inside a political campaign in order to see what an utterly cynical process it actually is.

[ghost_flash]

I think if everyone voted, or at least 70 percent for crying out loud, nobody could complain about who won. If politicians knew for sure that 80 or 90 percent would vote, then they would be forced to watch their step in office. I sincerely doubt the integrety of anyone running for office from either party. It seems these types are incredibly power hungry, and yield it like they have a AMEX platinum card for their friends, family, and anyone that can give them something in return.

I would love it if we in the USA could get a record voter turnout.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by zigzag:
I share your concerns but my experience is that it has always been this way and always will be. If that makes me cynical, so be it - I simply regard it as realistic.

The only thing that surprises me is that, year after year, decade after decade, no matter how often they are lied to by both sides, people who should know better continue to buy into the rhetoric. Like second marriages, it appears to be a triumph of hope over experience.

The other remarkable thing, as these boards demonstrate all too well, is that people who should know better persist in arguing that their party is more virtuous than the other, i.e. that it's the other side that lies, plays dirty tricks, manipulates the media, uses profanity, etc. I find this idea comical and hopelessly naive, but it appears to be an aspect of human nature. What these people don't realize is that the very politicians they're so loyal to regard them as gullible sheep. Indeed, they count on it - they know that it's mostly make-believe and that they just have to sell it.

I think every citizen should be required to spend a week working inside a political campaign in order to see what an utterly cynical process it actually is.

I find your point of view very refreshing if not cynical a bit; nevertheless, I completely agree with you on this.

We see some politicians as saviors whom should be no different than some modern Messiah, yet, the image projected falls like a deck of card in the wind so easily. It is also amazing from reading the biography of some politicians how desillusioned they are themselves from the whole process, especially considering the demand the voters are puting on their backs.

Some politicians profit from it, while others crumble under the weigh. And there is a whole set of rituals and behaviors coded to that specific context that is a campaign that makes it a different experience from the inside compared to the outside.

Thanks zigzag for your post!

[chris v]

Originally posted by awcopus:


Do you share these concerns?

Your concerns have been duly noted in our database, citizen.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by ghost_flash:
I think if everyone voted, or at least 70 percent for crying out loud, nobody could complain about who won. If politicians knew for sure that 80 or 90 percent would vote, then they would be forced to watch their step in office. I sincerely doubt the integrety of anyone running for office from either party. It seems these types are incredibly power hungry, and yield it like they have a AMEX platinum card for their friends, family, and anyone that can give them something in return.

I would love it if we in the USA could get a record voter turnout.

I am not sure that less people would complain; my thinking would be that MORE people would complain, because more people with varied opinions are involved, and "forced" to choose among a limited pool of parties.

But certainly the act of voting should be more popular for the simple need of ownership of the democratic process by the population.

I am of those who think that not voting is an act of affirmation; I see no candidates to vote for, or seem to be in agreement with my ideas, I see no reasons, consequently to vote.

I read somewhere (I can't remember where) that "democracy stops at the time people start to vote themselves privileges" or something like that. The act of democracy stops after we vote, imho. After that, it can get out of control. I could only with difficulty vote for someone on the basis of an electoral campaign, with promises, looks and a marketing machinery in which hundreds of millions of dollars are supposed to make me believe it is the right person.

Hence the reason of my own disaffiliation with the whole arena of politics. I talk with some experience having been involved at various levels of political activity in Canada.
I can only imagine how much more complex it most be in the U.S!

This is my perception and I am certainly not asking anyone to agree with it.

[AKcrab]

Originally posted by ghost_flash:
I think if everyone voted, or at least 70 percent for crying out loud, nobody could complain about who won. If politicians knew for sure that 80 or 90 percent would vote, then they would be forced to watch their step in office. I sincerely doubt the integrety of anyone running for office from either party. It seems these types are incredibly power hungry, and yield it like they have a AMEX platinum card for their friends, family, and anyone that can give them something in return.

I would love it if we in the USA could get a record voter turnout.

Remember, we don't get to elect the president. Some group of people somewhere get together and really elect the president. Gee, now why is there voter apathy?

It wouldn't matter if 100% of the people voted, the candidates are still a bunch of liars and cheats.

Jack Ryan for president.

[awcopus]

Originally posted by zigzag:
I share your concerns but my experience is that it has always been this way and always will be. If that makes me cynical, so be it - I simply regard it as realistic.

The only thing that surprises me is that, year after year, decade after decade, no matter how often they are lied to by both sides, people who should know better continue to buy into the rhetoric. Like second marriages, it appears to be a triumph of hope over experience.

The other remarkable thing, as these boards demonstrate all too well, is that people who should know better persist in arguing that their party is more virtuous than the other, i.e. that it's the other side that lies, plays dirty tricks, manipulates the media, uses profanity, etc. I find this idea comical and hopelessly naive, but it appears to be an aspect of human nature. What these people don't realize is that the very politicians they're so loyal to regard them as gullible sheep. Indeed, they count on it - they know that it's mostly make-believe and that they just have to sell it.

I think every citizen should be required to spend a week working inside a political campaign in order to see what an utterly cynical process it actually is.

Your "triumph of hope over experience" analogy is on target. Especially because the electorate for the most part does not consist of young people, but rather, presumably, people who should know better, should hold public officials to standards of competency as opposed to partisanship.

Is the driving force behind most voting a kind of masochistic infatuation with the way advocating certain rhetoric makes voters feel about themselves... in other words, they know touching the stove will hurt, but hurt so good? So that in the end, politics is more about a narcisstic delusion of significance at the expense of concrete personal and economic freedoms? Maybe. I'm not this cynical.

I honestly believe that, in most cases, most voters "understand" that the candidates they are advocating for would benefit rather than harm America. I wouldn't say that their ignorance is an excuse for the harms that do, in fact, result from their decisions, but I would say that it qualifies them as not being malicious. Just reckless... malicious by default rather than on purpose. A distinction without a difference? Maybe not. The question is: would a diehard Democrat or Republican, upon investigation were to realize that theiri policies would in fact hurt or ruin people's lives... would they then be willing to abandon their partisanship for a more enlightened and moral form of activism.

Obviously, it's a question that can only be asked and answered on an individual basis, but I would guess that most partisans of the major parties are not guilty of advocating the harm of some to the benefit of others *consciously*. Most, I would say, have simply not studied the positions they advocate, are not asking the right questions to arrive at more thorough answers.