I say yes, you say no, OR People are Strange

1Athena1

Barbara - I cannot read the links from here, but I agree if you are suggesting that Obama will not be the one to do it.

I said earlier that I like Obama (love him, actually), but I have my own list of grievances. He is a great statesman and leader with the following liabilities and bad decisions (long list). One is that he will NOT be the one to show Goldman the door, especially as long as the likes of Geithner are with us. I can't think of anyone who will, though.

If your links say something else, I apologize .:-)

Beesie: What shocks me about the undecideds I specifically described (and not sure if I got my point across) is their inability to read through the lines and to develop an analytical and intuitive mind about what they read and hear. Remember: I am not talking about people who are apolotical, and don't follow politics. Those are not really undecideds - they are merely people who don't follow politics for whatever reason.

I am talking about people who read, follow, but still don't have the ability to "get it." They have apparently missed the culture wars and  failed to analyze the double-entendre of national politics and believe everything they read and hear and interpret it literally. I see those on the cable networks all the time, and they are the sort of duds that reporters love to parade so that they can continue to keep viewers hooked to election coverage, IMO.

Case in point: I have no sympathy for someone who could not decide between Palin and Biden at the time at which the VP debates were aired, sorry. It was very late in the season by then. Either you should really prefer Palin or your should really prefer Biden, for example, and if you couldn't make up your mind about who you preferred, there is some emotion or higher thinking lacking. Again, I am talking about people who are following the news, NOT people who are not. You are entitled to say: the hell with both, they are politicians, but not (IMO) to say that you (and by "you" I mean "one") can't see much daylight between them - at least not without me being totally judgemental . :-) Anyone who follows Palin, for example, will (or SHOULD) understand that her thinking and message are designed to hit specific buttons and parts of our culture. Anyone who follows Biden and reads about him has to get a very different reading, and these readings go beyond what either person says about a specific issue.

I suppose I have trouble with the "don't get it" aspect.

That is why I used the analogy of the restaurant in my previous post: imagine going to restaurants all over town for one year and, after that, not being able to say which ones you would recommend. Your taste buds must be on "off."

This has nothing to do with where you live because I am not talking about people who either do not follow events/don't want to/hate politics, etc... Nor is it about "rednecks' or not. "Rednecks" are as likely as not to follow politics and have an opinion, or not, and be undecided - or not.

I'm just talking about those dummies that CNN loves to parade at the final debates, days before really historic elections, in the past four general election cycles.

I hope I am clearer this time.

Perhaps my degree of impatience and intolerance comes from the fact that I have a sister with a Ph.D in economics from an Ivy League school. She is one of the dumbest people I have ever met. All of us in the family shake our heads about it. And even SHE had a strong opinion about these elections.... (sorry, sister) So I say: where do these other people come from ?????

Anyway, end of rant. Thanks for listening. The sky is getting grayer and more menacing by the minute here.

Anonymous

ADK

 David Plouffe was the campain manager for Patrick's first campaign  

1Athena1

ADK: It might interest you to know that both Patrick and Obama had the same strategist - David Axelrod - as the architect of their campaigns.

Dee, you have an outhouse? That's more room than I have here in my city box. Will have to brush my "tooth" sitting right here. 

Anonymous

athena

they both worked for him - "trying out" some of the themes - glad the 2 candidates won!!!

1Athena1

So am I, Caerus!!

ADK

John Walsh managed the first campaign in 2006, David Plouffe was hired for the second campaign in 2010.

crazy4carrots

Jumping in to add my 2 cents (CD) here about experience.  My views only:

1) In the U.S., the longer one sits in the Senate (or the House, for that matter) the more one is beholden to donors and lobbyists -- so extensive Senatorial experience is not necessarily a good thing and certainly doesn't guarantee that the Senator will vote in the best interests of all.

2) Having been governor of a state could mean that one was a bad governor, an indifferent governor, a part-time governor, or simply a state-centred governor who couldn't see the big (federal) picture. Again, that governor will inevitably be beholden to the folks and the corporations who put him/her there.

My preferences for a Prime Minister or President?  Someone well-educated, well-travelled, with an educated view of the world as a whole, well spoken and, above all, pragmatic.  The last one is not necessarily what many people prefer, but I want someone who can stand back and take the long view, and who won't jump into wars (as some are suggesting Obama do with Libya) that they can't afford and for which they cannot see a clear outcome.

Oh yes, it also helps to have good judgment in people.  Obama obviously had that during his campaign.  Maintaining economic advisors such as Geithner -- hmmmm, not such good judgment, IMO.  But then, we'll all have our eyes opened when we read his Presidential memoirs, I'm sure!

Oh, and for those of you who think Obama has been ineffective, I'll quote once more from Norman Orenstein, of the American Enterprise Institute and Financial Times (not leftist organizations by any means!) writing about the 2009-2010 Congress:

"This is one of the most productive Congresses in history"

It just didn't seem that way, with all the wrangling and the histrionics and the inability (by some) to accept the outcome of the 2008 election........

crazy4carrots

Oops, posted twice.

BarbaraA

JMO and a very informal one at that. I think we have probably 25% who care deeply and do their due diligence around the candidates. And we have another 25% who end up on the fence because the choice between Palin (You betcha) or Biden (he's a clean black man) is no choice at all. They are both buffoons. Then we have another 25% who are totally apathetic about politics and I suspect the final 25% are just jaded and cynical. This is by no means scientific, simply observational and totally just my opinion.

1Athena1

Barbara, your observations are in line with the numbers, if you consider the low participation rate we have in this country when election time comes around. Off to see if I can find comparative numbers in other countries....

And it also speaks to the fact that we are a spoiled people in some senses. We have a superb system and don't appreciate it enough. On the other hand, we are an empire in crisis and the country is more divided than ever about solving its problem of decline, whether real or not. Some, like the Tea Party, never wanted empire. Other conservatives always did, and were the hawks during the Cold War. And I honestly don't know what I could say about democrats. As for liberals, we are usually good at merely wringing our hands.

Too much cynicism is bad and leads to immobility, as I said in a previous post on this thread. Thank God for the naive who are willing to lead.

crazy4carrots

It's too bad Biden comes across to some folks as a buffoon -- he actually has quite an enviable history in foreign affairs and is pretty savvy - basically, everything Palin was not. Guess he's just too jovial for some! 

1Athena1

Yes, I think it's unfair to identify Biden with some remarks (he is, after all, Mr. Foot-in-Mouth) and not dwell on his distinguished record heading both the foreign affairs and the judiciary committees in the senate.

1Athena1

Ok, here is some data I customized in a table. It is hard to compare apples with oranges, given that some countries do not have presidential elections per se. However, here is data on voter turnout, measured as percentage of the voting age population that actually showed up, (VAP Turnout %) and with the understanding that voters had decent access to registration booths, etc.. Source: International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, at: http://www.idea.int/

Country    Parliamentary         Presidential 
Argent.     70.88 (2007)        72.24 (2007)
Austria     75.61 (2008)        66.50 (2004)
Brazil       83.54 (2006)        83.57 (2006)
Canada    53.59 (2008)
Estonia    53.44 (2007)
France     54.52 (2007)        76.75 (2007)
Germ.      71.99 (2005)
Jamaica   49.56 (2007)
Japan      66.62 (2005)
Switz.      39.79 (2007)
US           37.32 (2006)        58.23 (2008)

kadeeb

I think Biden has the same problem I have sometimes. His mouth kicks in gear before his brain has processed the information.

kadeeb

I don't really know where I would stand in the statistical evaluation of the voting public. I went to the poles made my decision but hated that there was so little to choose from considering the size of this nation. I thought both sides were lying and twisting facts to prop up their points. They attacked the other side but rarely provided solutions outside of suggesting the issue needed to be studied and if elected would address the problem. Address it How?  Those studys cost money. Why does there have to be a study on everything? I'm surprised either party can walk after straddeling the fence during the entire campaign.

ananda8

I love Biden.  During the election, he would do the standard stump speech and got the standard applause.  The he would take off his jacket and the crowd would quiet down and lean forward because Biden would start to talk about his family, his dad, mom, grandma.  I loved those stories.

Biden also has a terrific sense of humor.  He has been the subject of many spoofs in the satirical online paper, the Onion and he thinks they're funny.  One can only imagine how Palin would react.

http://www.theonion.com/video/biden-criticized-for-appearing-in-hennessy-ads,14392/

Beesie

Linda, I agree with you that a President or Prime Minister should be "well-educated, well-travelled, with an educated view of the world as a whole, well spoken and, above all, pragmatic."  I particularly agree with the "pragmatic" part.  I still think that experience is very necessary - experience in the Senate, experience as a Governor, experience as a Mayor, experience managing a large organization or business.... something that shows that how this person operates as a leader and how they make decisions.  I wasn't suggesting that just having the experience is enough (i.e. putting in the time) although most of us learn and hone our skills as we gain experience. So just putting in the time is useful.  But more importantly, the experience provides voters with an opportunity to see how this individual operates, who they appear to be beholden to, where they are willing to compromise and where they don't, whether they are effective at building consensus, etc.....  If someone was a bad Governor or a part-time Governor, well then that experience will tell voters not to vote for them for a higher position.  Every politician is beholden to someone; when someone with little experience is elected, you simply have no record of who this individual might be beholden to.   

The President of the United States is, in my opinion, the single most important job in the world.  I don't think that someone should be put in this position who has to learn on the job. Yes, over time they might learn and improve and they might end up being a great President, but the risks of what might happen as they learn and fumble around are simply too great.  

Athena, in your earlier post you said:
"I must confess that I have no respect - none - for people who have cast themselves as "undecided" in the last 3 or 4 general election cycles (not talking about any other elections). How can any person with any IQ be "torn" between Bush and Gore, for example, or McCain and Obama? I can understand not voting due to lack of interest in politics, or not caring enough, but something that floors me every time is seeing people who say they read the papers and watch television and are "undecided." I think there must be a major, major learning disability or cognitive impairment there."

What I was trying to point out is that there are people who might be very interested in politics and very knowledgeable about the issues who still are "undecided" as the election nears.  These may be people who, like myself, don't fall neatly into any one camp.  Someone might listen to the candidates, read everything, read between the lines and really get it. He/she might fully understand all of the subtleties and subtext of the positions taken by the Democratic candidate, and fully understand all of the subtleties and subtext of the positions of the Republican candidate. But what happens then if he/she agrees with (or at least leans towards) the Democratic candidate on 50% of the major issues and agrees with (or at least leans towards) the Republican candidate on the other 50%?   Or if he/she agrees with one of the candidates on 65% of the issues but has a real concern about that candidate's leadership abilities and honesty and integrity?  In those types of situations, isn't it logical that this individual might be undecided right up until the end?

What I find strange are those who support a party and that party's candidates regardless of who they are and what they say.  To support every Democratic just because they're a Democrat, or every Republican just because they're a Republican, and to ignore what are sometimes glaring shortcomings in the candidate, that's what's odd to me.  But then as PIP pointed out, here in Canada we don't have to register as a Conservative or Liberal or NDP and we don't have the same party allegiances that you have in the U.S.. Personally I'm glad because I think it makes us more open to listening to and assessing each sides' position.  

bluedahlia

This is upsetting.

 http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/12/missouri-puppy-mill-repeal/

Missouri Legislature Poised To Repeal Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Referendum

For years, Missouri earned the dubious distinction as the nation's "puppy mill capital" because its lax humane regulations and enforcement allowed dog breeders to raise puppies at low costs in terrible, overcrowded conditions. Last fall, Missouri voters approved a referendum to finally solve this problem - the Puppy Mill Cruelty Prevention Act - which mandates regular veterinarian inspections of breeding facilities and ensures a basic level of treatment for dogs, such keeping temperatures between 45 and 85 degrees. Tea party groups stridently opposed the referendum, arguing it was "just another example of big government meddling in people's lives." Now, capitalizing on the big gains they made in November, Republicans in the state legislature are poised to repeal the regulations Missouri's voters enacted:

Saying the new requirements would put the dog breeding industry out of business, the state Senate voted 20-14 on Thursday for a wholesale rewrite.

On the cutting room floor: rules limiting kennels to 50 breeding dogs and requiring annual hands-on veterinary exams and larger, ground-level cages with access to the outdoors.

Instead, veterinarians would do walk-through inspections at least twice a year and provide exercise plans for dogs. Dogs could be confined in stacked cages so long as they had solid surfaces to lie on.

The bill still has to make it through the state House, and Gov. Jay Nixon (D) has not yet said whether he would sign or veto the bill. Editorializing against the state Senate vote, the Kansas City Star wrote that the "senators showed an arrogant disrespect for Missourians" who voted for better treatment of the animals. "The state legislature, held hostage to interests that regard dogs as just another form of livestock, has ignored the problems for years," the paper added.

bluedahlia

Let's do our part and not buy from pet stores/puppy mills.

Marple

Amen to that Blue.

crazy4carrots

Oh my, that is just truly awful.  Any animal lover would be outraged.

AnnNYC

That is really terrible.

I also fail to see how a referendum -- an issue put directly to a popular vote -- can be construed as "just another example of big government meddling in people's lives."

 

iodine

Hi Barbara: you said (a few pages back):

Then I had to adjust to the culture shock of living amongst rednecks. Not all folks here are rednecks but understand, in DC I had never even met a redneck.

My son lives in DC and I can assure you there are plenty of "rednecks" there.  Of course, one's definition of "redneck" varies accroding to one's place of birth.  Being  a Southern woman, I get my neck hairs raised when someone uses the term, and when I'm unsure that they really understand what an insult that term can be to a Southern person.  Or that the individual knows the real meaning of the word. 

I hope you will consider that some take offense to that term.

konakat

Puppy mills should be put out of business!!!!!  The Republicans put puppy mill owners wants over those of the citizens.  And safety of puppies.  PUPPIES!!!!

Medigal

Why would any one take offense at being called a "red-neck".  To me it just means a very hard working person who works in the sun all day.  However, I was told by DP that the negative version came about when it had something to do with the Unions and one side wore "red scarves".  It came to mean a "hillbilly" or uneducated person.  However, I bet there are "rednecks" now who have better eductions than some of us on here and better jobs to go with it!  You know how the old saying goes "I don't care what you call me, just call me in time to pick up my big paycheck!"  (I just made that up so don't waste time trying to find it in historical remarks!)

I think we went from Cajun land to Redneck land and all I see is the same nice, hard working (if they have a job today) people in both places.  It's sad how some people can tag certain negative meanings to what they call other humans.  It's like if you call an Italian, an Italian, it's great but you call one a "Dago" or "Wop" and it's a call to arms!  Now that political correctness has been born, I think people try to stay away from this type of name calling and it's for the best.

bluedahlia

Medigal, I thought we were all involved with organized crime.....hehehehe!

KK, yeah, that is unbelievable!

iodine

I am actually a 'hillbilly", since I now live in the mountains --hills--of TN --no oil tho, sadly.  I am also worn out with all the political correctness in the world.  I dislike labels of most kinds, but love being called GRITS--Girls Raised In The South.  LOL  I do not like being referred to as a redneck, tho, because where I come from, western TN, (by way of 'round the world, BTW) the term is insulting.  I imagine there are many regional terms that are the same across the nation---well, maybe not Wash. state---they are Way laid back.  LOL

I couldn't vote for Trump, the guy's ego is way above his ability, IMO, and he'd not be one I'd depend on for that 3 AM phone call.  You'd also have to have a huge ego, meaning he'd not listen to anyone else's opinion, to wear a comb over as stupid looking as that one.

Undecided people to me are in the majority around this house: I just couldn't decide which one to vote Against!  Obama didn't have enough experience and McCain had Palin.  I voted for Nader (honest to God, I DID) just to make a point that we need better candidates, maybe even more parties!.  I've wasted sooooo many votes in an effort to complain about the poor quality of candidates.  Let's face it, one HAS to be rich to run--and you have to know rich people to get their money, to run.  I'm all for the Blank vote!

I agree with Medigal on the fact that Obama had a chance to really make a difference and did/has not.  He surrounded himself with a bunch of lawyers who don't know squat about government and leading a nation. (not to say All lawyers are awful) Let's face it folks, it's not just the Person running, but his cabinet that we vote for, the people running the nation are the advisers that a president chooses.

I also agree that the longer a person stays in Any office, the more favors he owes.  The new reps began raising money even before they were sworn in!  I am a huge believer in term limits and feel that a rep should have 2 terms and Go Home, that a senator should have 1-2 terms and Go Home. 

edited for such awful spelling!  and to add that I like the blank vote!

kadeeb

Medigal,

The stuff I make up doesn't sound that good. I have heard another version, I don't care what you call me just call me in time for supper. Speaking of which, I don't know what the heck I'm going to do about that tonight. Can't think of anything that really sounds good.

Blue, we are. We're just playing nice for the moment. It's a ploy to make everyone think we're harmless. 

bluedahlia

Ray made curried chicken with jasmine rice.  HEHE Kadeeb!

iodine

We get Chinese take out tonight!