These are themes that have echoed throughout this campaign. Since the very beginning of the race, since even before then in Obama's '04 convention speech this has been a race about opposing world views.
Fear vs. Hope has already been played out slightly. Even the famous Obama slogan is shifting away from hope. But from my view (just slightly biased) McCain has run his campaign on the principle of fear. The terrorists will attack us again, Vote McCain; the sky is falling, Vote McCain; your children aren't safe, Vote McCain. Everything is much worse than you imagine it is, Vote McCain. Whereas Obama has relied on the idea that America is a strong and resilient country that has lost its way slightly, and we can get back on track so long as we have faith and hope that we can do the right thing. Obama voiced these sentiments again when he accepted the party nomination back in Colorado. Voters need to chose hope in the election over voting out of fear.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/27/obamas-closing-speech-seeks-unity-faults-mccain/
The concept of Unity vs. Division has been handled much differently. Obviously both candidates are going to be claiming the idea of Unity as a central campaign tactic. The most glaring example that comes to mind is the disgusting comments made by Palin and echoed by McCain about the parts of the country that are, "real America."
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/palin-visits-a-pro-america-kind-of-town/?scp=1&sq=pro-america&st=cse
The underlying concept of this is that there are in fact Two Americas and what it makes me believe is that if McCain and Palin are elected they would only be concerned with representing the America that voted for them. As opposed to Obama with his message of unity no matter who becomes the next president.
The next president is going to inherit an extremely bad economic crisis, and at that point it is going to be more crucial for the President to be able to unite the nation under one grand cause than what the president's preferred tax policy is going to be.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Monday, October 13, 2008
WHY AREN'T WE TALKING ABOUT THIS?!
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/11/us/politics/11trooper.html?scp=5&sq=palin&st=cse
John McCain seemed to have picked Sarah Palin to get another "maverick" on the ticket. He wanted to prove to America that he was the person that could bring change to Washington. One of the things that is implied when you say you're going to "fix" Washington is corruption and cronyism.
We've just discovered that Palin used both of these tactics while she was governor of Alaska, and yet no one is really talking about it. She used her position to unlawfully fire people based on a purely personal vendetta. Palin's sister's husband leaves his wife and suddenly Palin is using every ounce of her authority to get the man fired. She even went so far as firing people hirer up that refused to kowtow to her wishes to get the trooper fired.
What kills me is that no one is seriously talking about this. Maybe the media is afraid of seeming to sexist, maybe the financial stories are just truly more important right now. But this is an issue of the utmost importance and it needs to be discussed because this, in my opinion, disqualifies Palin from being the Vice President.
Voters want to know what candidates positions are on every topic under the sun: abortion, the war, the economy, the environment. People always hope that what a politician says while campaigning is what will actually happen. I'd be willing to go so far as to say most of the time politicians hold basically true to what they discuss during campaigns, but what really matters is knowing that the person has good judgement. Voters want to know how candidates stand on issues that are pertinent to them now. But we need to know that they will make the best possible decision when situations we cannot even imagine are presented.
The conclusion that the Alaska Inquiry came to illustrates perfectly the type of decision making we can expect from Sarah Palin. If she as Governor is willing to make corrupt decisions imagine what she would do if she was vested with the power of the Vice Presidency.
This is not some nit picking matter either. This issue needs to be a legitimate concern for every citizen of the U.S. I can only hope that with markets improving dramatically this story hits the news cycles and sticks.
John McCain seemed to have picked Sarah Palin to get another "maverick" on the ticket. He wanted to prove to America that he was the person that could bring change to Washington. One of the things that is implied when you say you're going to "fix" Washington is corruption and cronyism.
We've just discovered that Palin used both of these tactics while she was governor of Alaska, and yet no one is really talking about it. She used her position to unlawfully fire people based on a purely personal vendetta. Palin's sister's husband leaves his wife and suddenly Palin is using every ounce of her authority to get the man fired. She even went so far as firing people hirer up that refused to kowtow to her wishes to get the trooper fired.
What kills me is that no one is seriously talking about this. Maybe the media is afraid of seeming to sexist, maybe the financial stories are just truly more important right now. But this is an issue of the utmost importance and it needs to be discussed because this, in my opinion, disqualifies Palin from being the Vice President.
Voters want to know what candidates positions are on every topic under the sun: abortion, the war, the economy, the environment. People always hope that what a politician says while campaigning is what will actually happen. I'd be willing to go so far as to say most of the time politicians hold basically true to what they discuss during campaigns, but what really matters is knowing that the person has good judgement. Voters want to know how candidates stand on issues that are pertinent to them now. But we need to know that they will make the best possible decision when situations we cannot even imagine are presented.
The conclusion that the Alaska Inquiry came to illustrates perfectly the type of decision making we can expect from Sarah Palin. If she as Governor is willing to make corrupt decisions imagine what she would do if she was vested with the power of the Vice Presidency.
This is not some nit picking matter either. This issue needs to be a legitimate concern for every citizen of the U.S. I can only hope that with markets improving dramatically this story hits the news cycles and sticks.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
My Friends, my friends, my friends.
I swear I literally have that phrase stuck in my head now. Over and over McCain drilled those two words into our heads. Why? Because he's trying to make it seems that he's the average guy and Obama is the elitist. I like Chris Rock's argument for who we should elect, we need the man who only owns one house in office, not 13. McCain is up against the ropes, he knows he can't make direct attacks because with his poll numbers slipping it'd make him look more desperate. So he resorts to bizarre tactics like trying to make us all believe we're his friend. I say bizarre because of how extremely disingenuous it feels to me as an audience member. McCain saying that he's my friend just makes my skin crawl a little bit. You can't spout off terrible ideas for 90 minutes then expect me to want to hang out. I'm honestly curious what the numbers are for good ol' "Who'd you rather have a beer with" poll, because I bet Obama would win it.
This latest debate really, changed nothing. I didn't expect it to but there's always that outside hope that McCain will drop the N word or something insane. I'm frustrated with both candidates in how the talking points haven't changed at all from the last debate. The rhetoric outside the debates has become decidedly more pointed but both men seem afraid to be on the attack when their opponent is in the room.
The biggest issue was obviously the economy, but this is also where we see the sharpest division between the two candidates. Strangely, both want to lower our taxes and still save money, awesome! But Obama's plan actually explicitly states where the extra funds would come from for his domestic policy. McCain's plan seems to be prepared to be reactionary. Freezing all government spending is a bad, reactive idea, and this is his plan!
We all know that debates don't actually effect how people vote. But McCain does seem to be on a steady decline. So what's that mean then? Maybe the American people are sobering up to the fact that McCain's just not as good a candidate. Or maybe that's just me...
This latest debate really, changed nothing. I didn't expect it to but there's always that outside hope that McCain will drop the N word or something insane. I'm frustrated with both candidates in how the talking points haven't changed at all from the last debate. The rhetoric outside the debates has become decidedly more pointed but both men seem afraid to be on the attack when their opponent is in the room.
The biggest issue was obviously the economy, but this is also where we see the sharpest division between the two candidates. Strangely, both want to lower our taxes and still save money, awesome! But Obama's plan actually explicitly states where the extra funds would come from for his domestic policy. McCain's plan seems to be prepared to be reactionary. Freezing all government spending is a bad, reactive idea, and this is his plan!
We all know that debates don't actually effect how people vote. But McCain does seem to be on a steady decline. So what's that mean then? Maybe the American people are sobering up to the fact that McCain's just not as good a candidate. Or maybe that's just me...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)