So, there was a brief, shining moment of hope for me in this Presidential election, when I heard that Hillary had decided she would not attack her opponents, but instead would focus on the issues. Recently, however, her promises broke down, and she and Obama decided that a war of words was a better use of their campaign time. And so, the same old-same old political game starts again.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I was really hoping that this year would be different. I was really hoping that for once, we would get a real campaign with real issues. Call me naive or what have you, but I thought we might actually get to hear what the candidates think about the important problems facing the voters. That hope was shot down early in the campaign when I watched the first two debates, and realized the candidates were more interested in soundbites than they were in real debate. However, I was hoping that at least we would get soundbites about the issues, and not about how the other candidates suck. Alas, all hope is lost. What we have to look forward to is a long, drawn-out campaign of sniping at one another.
I dream of a day where the candidates actually talk about their stance and not about each other. I long for the time where I can actually know what my candidate will do in office BEFORE they get there. And I think the rest of America does too, especially with the recent experience of Bush Jr. fresh in our minds. And yet, this election will more likely than not be a repeat of last time - choosing the lesser of multiple evils, and hoping that the person who wins will do something good, without any real basis for that hope. When will politicians give up on attacking one another and start informing the public - oh right, they can't do that because then they wouldn't get elected, because none of them can do what they promise.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Candidates do talk about what they'll do before they get elected. They issue long, detailed policy papers. Well, okay, Republican candidates generally don't - but Democratic candidates do. If you really want to read those things, have at it. Or check out transcripts of panels featuring their top advisors.
What you seem to be bemoaning is the fact that the voters aren't ever made aware of these things. I blame that more on the disinterest of the voters and the nature of the media than I do on the candidates.
While I appreciate your information, Scott, what I am really bemoaning is that fact that the most public and watched way for the candidates to get their information across is through campaign ads and these debates. But instead of talking about the issues, they talk about each other, and leave the general public to find out about these policy papers on their own. So yes, that does speak to the disinterest of the public, I suppose, and the fault of the media. But I feel it is also fair to blame the candidates, who use the time given them to talk to the public to snark at one another, instead of informing the public. Sounds to me that they would rather have the important issues buried in red tape and administrative quagmire than out in the open in a debate. And that sounds to me too much like the politicians we already have to make me comfortable.
Post a Comment