Fri Jan 25, 2013, 07:59 AM
MadHound (34,179 posts)
A huge part of the problem with our political process.
You see it in the media, on political blogs, even around here. Whispers, speculation, and advocacy for one presidential candidate or another. Hillary, Kerry, Kucinich. Jeb, Ryan, Paul.
Look folks, it is just under four years out for the next presidential election, potential candidates, even pundits, haven't even started cranking it up about the mid term elections. Candidates haven't even announced any sort of interest. Can we please put the electioneering for 2016 on hold for a couple of years?
We don't need to be in perpetual campaign mode, in fact doing so is detrimental to the well being of our country. Doing so antagonizes people, turns them against each other, and takes their focus off of the very important work that needs to be done between now and then.
So please, drop the speculation, the campaigning, and focus on what is most important for the country right now. There will be plenty of time to cheer for your candidate and insult the others in two years. Right now we need your focus, your energy, employed in the actual process of governing this country, and we don't need peoples' attention and energy divided, with one eye on the 2016 election and the other on what is happening now.
4 replies, 510 views
A huge part of the problem with our political process. (Original post)
|Lurks Often||Jan 2013||#3|
Response to MadHound (Original post)
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 08:06 AM
KharmaTrain (31,706 posts)
1. If We Believed The Corporate Media...
...we'd have already had President Mario Cuomo, Hillary Clinton, Rudy Ghouliani and Jebbieboosh. It's the circle jerk season in punditry...like the off-season in sports where the "hot stove" league heats up and hours upon hours are filled with what my late father would call mental masturbation. Nothing's sexier than playing Presidential sweepstakes...it's an ego stroke for all mentioned and, again, fills up the hours of air time (plus it's far cheaper to get a bunch of talking heads circle jerking than to pay a quality investigative reporter).
I'm with you about all the games and names being thrown around out here. Besides being too early to even venture who will be running, there is an election coming up in 2014 that is shaping up to be of far more importance than 2016...and that's where the focus should be. However, this being an internet water cooler you can't stop the circle jerking...it's just too much fun for some.
Response to MadHound (Original post)
Fri Jan 25, 2013, 08:24 AM
napoleon_in_rags (3,989 posts)
2. Parties lose when they lose touch with zeitgeist.
Zeitgeist, the "spirit of the times". Obama was a child of Zeitgeist, he really came out of nowhere and spoke to the spirit of the times in 2008. We were ready for something different, something fresh. In 2012 he was more stale, but the Republicans ran a guy who was even staler, their number 2 choice from 4 years ago, and before that they ran the number 2 guy from 2000.
The fact is that everybody they're talking about running now will be stale as hell in 2016, more so because of the hype. What really needs to happen is about a year before the election, they really need to take inventory of how America is feeling, what's trending, and find the person who speaks exactly to that, no matter how fringe or inexperienced they are. That's what will give people the exilerating feeling of being heard, what will motivate people to vote.
I had a friend many years ago who was fond of quoting Dostoevsky, saying "people will do anything, even things against their own self interest, to prove to themselves that they are free". I've NEVER been able to finding evidence of Dostoevsky saying anything like that, but its one of the best quotes I've heard. Mark my words, any "pre-ordained" choice for 2016, anybody who gets to run because "now its their turn, damned what the people are thinking", is totally doomed. The person who will win in 2016 is the person who comes across as most receptive to whatever the hell the people want to at that point in history, and only time will tell what that will be.