Political Debates

ray a · April 2007

Last week the Democrats debated among themselves as they jockey for position. But, was it really a debate or just a mere infomercial for the Democratic Party. And will the upcoming Republican debate be nothing more than a political infomercial? We are a year and a half away from the election. Is anyone besides the candidates and the news media interested yet? Who cares if Obama or Hillary is in first place, the race really hasn't even begun yet.

But, more importantly, will this be the first Post Modernist election? Ultimately, are the more concerned about the issues or are we more concerned with electing the first woman or the first black regardless of their positions? It seems conservatives support Guiliani even though he takes an opposing view on many issues they hold dear. Will people ultimately vote for who they "like" as opposed to who most closely supports their world view?

NaeNae55 · April 2007

And some people decide who they like before they decide their world view

allsteaks · April 2007

You make a very interesting statement and I agree it is too early for anything but posturing. You can't expect much more from the Republican debate except instead of trashing the President, they will only try to distance themselves from him. Democrats, in my opinion, have not done very well with their newly reinstated power. And they can't keep their leadership's mouths shut. They could really screw this whole thing up and have everyone except the farthest of the far leftist favoring them.
Unfortunately 2008 could end up being a "signature" election, as you refer to as Post Modernist, instead of an issues election. Female, African American/Muslim/Baptist, divorced Catholic NYC hero, Breck girl, former POW, actor/Senator/actor. Wow, all the quality Americans could hope for!
Good topic for discussion and thanks for starting it. No doubt my colors will show in later posts.

Paul in Cannon Beach · April 2007

Politics is the true national pastime so why not get started early? Call it spring training...

Here is my take for what its worth:

Obama - started strong but other than soundbites, whats he got? He has made some dumb statements that show his lack of experience. Status: Faltering

Edwards - Can't get past his pretty boy image. Doesn't believe there is a "global war on terror". Apparently he needs to see an Al Queda attack in the Antarctic... Status: Used to be blow dried, now just blows...

Hillary - Leading simply because she isn't making huge mistakes. New book coming out might put her on the defensive. Status: the only woman in Washington Bill Clinton isn't hitting on.

Romney - No Mitt-mentum going. Attempt at being a social conservative could come off hollow. Is America ready for a Mormon president? Status: Needs some caffeine in his campaign

Guilianni - Guilliani is Italian for "Obama". Started strong but his past could be both a blessing and a curse. Possible too outspoken and not conservative enough to win the nomination. Status: Fuhgeddaboutit!

McCain - Gaining steam. The guy was a war prisoner so the campaign trail can't be all that tough. A proven record but something of a maverick. His support for the war in Iraq could win or lose votes depending on how its going over there. Status: the Stealth Candidate

ray a · May 2007

Well, that leads to the question of how one should vote. Do you "waste" your vote on a candidate whose positions are in line with your own, or do you suck it up and cast your vote for the lesser of several evils trying to ensure the best of the worst gets it? You left a few candidates off your list, Paul. One that conservatives should consider is Mike Huckabee from AK. From what I've read he is a true conservative, not like Guiliani or McCain or Romney who could all easily switch sides based on their current or past positions.

Dutch2 · May 2007

Isn't Huckabee from AR and not AK?
Or maybe I've just had to much coffee this morning.

ray a · May 2007

You're right.

ray a · May 2007

Yes, Alsteaks. What I mean by post modernist is that the issues won't matter to many or most voters, truth can be whatever you want it to be. They will vote for whomever is most likeable or perceived to be believeable. For example, Guiliani seems to be a favorite now of conservatives. Their current support is based on his tough stance, his response to 9/11, and that he will not waffle and they trust him to do as he says - he's a straight shooter. Yet he is on the opposite side of some key issues they highly value. Conservative support for Guiliani goes against their worldview, or philosophy. Will Democrats vote for Hillary or Obama just so they can proudly claim they supported the first female or first black candidate, regardless of their positions?

marc · May 2007

The one with the best hair will win.

That used to be true, W changed that.

These days, the races never really stop. They pause for a few days, for some chest beating and inappropriate trash talking and then immediately start up.

Those we elect have little time to actually do they jobs they were elected to do. I get so cynical about this. Politics!!

allsteaks · May 2007

Part of each voter's decision has to be whether to back the candidate that best espouses their own beliefs or to support the candidate closest to their beliefs but may be able to win. Ralph Nader likes to run and a select group always supports him, knowing he can't be elected. Maybe they think they're sending a message to the mainstream parties, but the message was lost after his first run.
Or do they vote against the candidate they like least.. Demos can laud their great victory in 2006 but it was really the Repubs who lost it.

ray a · May 2007

Yes, this election could be all about who is most unlike Bush.

Paul in Cannon Beach · May 2007

How about Fred Thompson?

Actually, I think a moderate Democrat could sweep this thing. Its the natural reaction to 8 years of GOP dominance.

The problem is, how do you find a moderate Democrat who can appease the wacko element of the liberal left?

ray a · May 2007

A moderate Dem doesn't have to appeal to the wacko left. They have to have cross over appeal to the Repubs. Right now Edwards is the most likely to fall into that category since he is very upper class preppy and could appeal to the country club Repubs.

ACU Frank · May 2007

I agree. As a Dem, I've never understood the need to kowtow to certain groups on the left. It's not like they're going to throw their support to a Republican if you don't.

Although, the same holds true of Republicans and the whackjobs on the right. I know you don't want to admit there are any, though...

ray a · May 2007

The same does hold true on both sides of the fence. A true conservative Repub candidate doesn't stand a chance of winning after Bush. Guiliani, who could easily register as a Dem, would have the most cross-over appeal and probably is the Repub with the best chance of winning.

Elizabetharess · May 2007

I don't think either party has much to pick from. Here's something I am going to throw in the mix...I am not too aware of it and I have heard some people discussing the candidates based on their Israel politics. It seems, and this may be just conspiracy theory, that ALL Dems that are in the running refuse to renounce Israel and its tactics of terror and that Israel is being groomed to bring us into war with Iran so the beat goes on...War ends in Irag-War begins in Iran...Crazy?????

ray a · May 2007

Israel and it's tactics of terror??? Wait a minute. Do you hear Israel boasting that they are going to wipe Arabs off the map? Does Israel arbitrarily attack their neighbors just to harass them? Other Middle Eastern countries and political entities have vowed to destroy Israel which forces them to defend herself. What do you expect them to do, hand the keys of the city to the President of Iran?

NeedCoffee · May 2007

I think you need to do a little more research into Israel - either that or the people you've been talking to watch too much British news.

Israel and "tactics of terror?" Please.

LarryC · May 2007

I'm sick and tired of extremists on both sides of the aisle running things and setting agendas (AKA platforms). I look forward to the time when reasonable thinking and common sense will overpower the black and white thinking extremists who are running both parties. Even the "other" political parties are just narrow minded, extremist off-shoots of the two majors.

I'll be voting for Ralph Nader again. He conquered the Corvair, so, I mean, what more could you want? It's either Ralph Nader or Yosemite Sam. I'm still waffling and can't make up my mind. Where's Pat Paulson when he's needed the most?

ray a · May 2007

Hey! I liked the Corvair. It was a car ahead of it's time.

Dutch2 · May 2007

I had a used convair and it was a Lemon! It ran ok when you could get it started. It turend out to be easier to just park it up hill and get it rollin' and then pop the clutch to start it. It was a lot of fun to drive, once you could get it goin'. Didn't keep it very long. Traded it back to the same auto dealner for a '65 Fire Engine Red Ford Galaxie 500 with a 390 T-Bird engine... that car was like a tank.

LarryC · May 2007

I drove a neighbor's Corvair Spyder once. I didn't realize I was driving a death trap until Ralph told me.

allsteaks · May 2007

The difficulty I have is none of the candidates in this race or in previous elections present their positions objectively. It seems the real priority is appealing to emotions and sensitivities instead of substance. All form, no function (like a Corp. HR job, just kidding). I guess fluff sells, at least that's what keeps the media's attention.

ray a · May 2007

Ah yes, hence the point of my original post. And thanks Allsteaks for getting us back on track after that little sidetrip in a Corvair.

But in truth, aren't most effective ads aimed at telling the voters how horrible the opponent is?

Elizabetharess · May 2007

Yes, where is Pat Paulson????

ray a · May 2007

Some would say he was reincarnated as George Bush.

LarryC · May 2007

Elizabeth, Pat is dead and is no longer capable of carrying on a productive life of any sort. That, however, does not disqualify him from campaigning for and becoming president. As a matter of fact he would find welcome company at any level of elected government.

allsteaks · May 2007

Hey nobody objected to my Corp HR comment; guess that means we all agree = consensus!!! Now that you've been accused of reaching consesus, the only possible remedy is polarization!!! So start the attack ads.
Was Pat Paulson ever actually on a ballot or was he always a write-in?

ray a · May 2007

I agreed with your Corp comment.

Political Debates

Comments