U.S. Presidential Election 2008

[Sean]

Looks like there's a smackdown going on. I feel like only one of these people is telling the truth regarding a story that the press lobbed out at them all earlier today about Obama saying that many Pennsylvanians who have lost good jobs and are facing things like looming forclosures tend to feel bitter. I don't think I'm being biased when I say that Obama appears to have won the argument about this in the Boston Globe to me:

The McCain campaign also criticized Obama for the comments, saying that "it shows an elitism and condescension towards hard-working Americans that is nothing short of breathtaking."

'I'M IN TOUCH'

In Indiana, Obama bristled at the suggestion he did not understand voters' concerns.

"Out of touch? Out of touch? I mean, John McCain -- it took him three tries to finally figure out that the home foreclosure crisis was a problem and to come up with a plan for it, and he's saying I'm out of touch?" Obama said.

"Senator Clinton voted for a credit card-sponsored bankruptcy bill that made it harder for people to get out of debt after taking money from the financial services companies, and she says I'm out of touch?" he told a crowd in Terre Haute, Indiana. "No, I'm in touch. I know exactly what's going on. ... People are fed up. They're angry and they're frustrated and they're bitter."

Clinton, whose father was from Pennsylvania, said in Philadelphia she had a lot of affection for the state and enjoyed traveling through it.

"It's being reported that my opponent said that the people of Pennsylvania who faced hard times are bitter. Well, that's not my experience," she said.

"As I travel around Pennsylvania, I meet people who are resilient, who are optimistic, who are positive, who are rolling up their sleeves. They are working hard everyday for a better future, for themselves and their children," she said.

I like that Obama went after both candidates hard, but did it by clearly focusing on issues that we all experience and want to see improved in very fundamental, day to day, real-life ways. I believe that he's so consistantly aware of the things so many people respond to because that's the way he thinks. He understands the shared needs and wants of the vast majority of us, and says he wants to focus on them constructively as President. Sounds good to me.

Clinton's argument makes me feel like she pretty much just wants me to trust her...just roll up my sleeves and get to work in the comfort of knowing that I can leave the big decisions up to smart people like her, and then everything will be all right. The only problem is, I can't trust her because she's blatantly lied to me so many god damned times. And just after she almost, just barely acknowledged that she may have "misspoke" to us just this one time, freakin' Bill comes out wagging his finger again, basically saying "Hillary told the truth, and she told that true story about Bosnia only once, late at night, like at 11pm, that's late for her, so it was really, really late and she was really super-exhausted", even though in reality, she told the Bosnia lie multiple times over at least a month, often in the mid-morning hours. If she's so tired that she's delusional at 11pm every night, then what's she going to do when the phone rings at 3am? And the Bosnia story was a lie, not a "misspeak". No sane person accidentally believes they were once dodging sniper fire while running across the tarmac in Bosnia with their young daughter. And certainly no one then genuinly tells the entire world that story because they truly remember it that way. There are only two explanations: One, she's clinically delusional which is an unacceptable quality in a Presidential candidate, or two, she lied about the story because she thought it would strengthen her claim of significant foreign policy experiences, and she didn't think she'd get caught at it. And I don't believe she's delusional, I think she's a selfish liar. So if I can't trust her, and she's not even telling me that she understands what issues most of us really need addressed to simply make life better, then what can I expect to get from her as President? Only what SHE thinks is best for us, she doesn't want to allow us to have a voice in the decision. And some of what she HAS said she thinks is best doesn't sound to me like it would be best for most of us. Like her heavily mandated health care plan. If she's President, she wants us to do what she tells us to do. That's not how I want it done. I want to be listened to and well considered on important issues that I need fixed, not talked down to and misunderstood.

And McCain is just taking little jabs that aren't landing, but he's got time to keep trying to land a big punch while Hillary and Obama keep fighting each other. A fight that Clinton keeps insisting should continue. Thanks, Hill! Hope the sarcasm's laid on thick enough there.

So go Obama!

[cacophony]

Originally Posted by Sean

So my conclusion at this point is that Hillary supporters have to be either willfully ignoring the glaring faults of their candidate, or flat out ignorant.

personally, and this may be overly cynical, i think there's a strong need to identify with victims in a portion of the population. we're a culture of victimization and we love nothing more than to back someone whose injustice we feel we can partake of. i honestly and truly believe that the most vehemently outspoken hillary supporters are more driven by their perception of her persecution-by-media than actual qualifications. it's not that they ignore the faults, it's that they don't believe in them. hillary is a victim, and they can participate in that victimization by proxy by supporting her until the bitter end.

and there you have it. my elitist view of the idiocracy of america.

[cacophony]

Originally Posted by Sean

Clinton, whose father was from Pennsylvania...

WHY DOES THIS MERIT MENTIONING, NEWS MEDIA?!??!

[Deckard]

Originally Posted by cacophony

...and there you have it. my elitist view of the idiocracy of america.

No need to feel you're being elitist. Openly acknowledging this idiocracy remains one of the biggest taboos of the current time - one that's far more insidious than the usual political correctness boogeymen the media likes to tear into.

</ot>

[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by Deckard

No need to feel you're being elitist. Openly acknowledging this idiocracy remains one of the biggest taboos of the current time - one that's far more insidious than the usual political correctness boogeymen the media likes to tear into.
</ot>

i'm ready to concede the point

[King of Snake]

BREAKING NEWS!

Diebold Accidentally Leaks Results Of 2008 Election Early

[BeautifulBurnout]

Originally Posted by King of Snake

BREAKING NEWS!

Diebold Accidentally Leaks Results Of 2008 Election Early

Awesome.

Dunno if anyone read the "tickertape" latest news scrolling across the bottom too? FAF.

[Strangelet]

See, this is why I resist the urge to be bitter about the intelligence of the common human

In Pennsylvania, the [bitter] flap seems to have marginally helped Obama more than hurt him: 24% said his handling of the issue made them think more highly of him; 15% said it made them think less highly of him; 58% said it made no difference in their views.

How surprising would this be if you only understood the tastes and awareness of society from listening to pundits on 24 hour news stations?
And if it is surprising, should we be thinking of a more appropriate model than the idiocracy? Maybe something that expresses the public not as apathetic morons first and foremost, but casualties of a shock and awe campaign of manipulation, one that is increasingly wearing thin?

Basically, what those in power should remember, is people smarten up real fast when their fundamental dreams and needs are thwarted.

[Deckard]

I admit that's actually surprising to me. And encouraging.

should we be thinking of a more appropriate model than the idiocracy?

Yes - to some degree.
I tend to resort to visions of an "idiocracy" more out of despair than anything else (like when reading about Clinton's lead in Pennsylvania returning to double digits following "bittergate"), but of course you're absolutely right that the source of much of this analysis/punditry needs to be viewed in some context as well, and these latest poll ratings are sufficient to, at the very least, re-evaluate the way I've been viewing it all up til now.

Also, as a general aside to no-one in particular, let me just make clear, in case it's not obvious, that my tendency to lapse into despair at what I see as widespread ignorance - whether it's Hillary's support, or the belief that Saddam had something to do with 9/11, or the number who believe that the world is only 8,000 years old and the Lord Jesus is their saviour - my inclination to roll my eyes at these things is never originating from a craving to elevate myself or just be a smug git. It is genuine despair that I feel. And some frustration.

[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by Deckard

Also, as a general aside to no-one in particular, let me just make clear, in case it's not obvious, that my tendency to lapse into despair at what I see as widespread ignorance - whether it's Hillary's support, or the belief that Saddam had something to do with 9/11, or the number who believe that the world is only 8,000 years old and the Lord Jesus is their saviour - my inclination to roll my eyes at these things is never originating from a craving to elevate myself or just be a smug git. It is genuine despair that I feel. And some frustration.

I'm with you there, mate.