Should we rethink this?

By this time Wednesday we may know who will be representing each party in the general election next November, but maybe not. We will certainly know which, if any, of the propositions will have passed in California. Most of you have already decided which way you will vote so I will spare you the last minutes propaganda concerning the issues behind the issues and the plans behind the candidates. I have done quite a bit of research and watched many of the other commentators and I think I know who supports what and why. If you want my additional insight, email me.

One thing that strikes me is the more frequent discussion surrounding a candidate’s ability to win. I have heard it from both parties, but most commonly from the democrats… “We have got to get a democrat in the White House.” My question is why?

For that matter, why do we “have to have a Republican” in office either? I understand the philosophical differences between the parties, but I am not always convinced that the candidates do. Way too often I have heard commentators reflect that they “really believe [insert name here] is the best candidate, but I just don’t think they can win.” What a sad nation we have become. How we have destroyed the process. What a shame that we have perverted the intent of our founding fathers to the extent that the election of the leader of the most powerful nation on earth to a popularity contest. As a high school teacher I have often pointed out the difference between running for Student Body President and running for actual political office, but it really isn’t that different after all. At least not any more. We are not so concerned with who is best equipped to lead our nation (and the world), than with what team they come from.

The system we have in place is based on the popular vote guiding a well-informed electorate in choosing a leader. However, it is more like an misinformed public not really effecting a corrupt electorate in choosing someone who best represents the currently most powerful lobbyists and special interest groups. In actuality, I think we are all special interest groups, but I digress. With the information age in full swing, we really have no need for the electorate system. We should still have the voting chapters, but only as a means for counting. It is time to let the people really decide. Of course, that would require people to vote the issues and not the candidates, and we are right back where we started.

2 thoughts on “Should we rethink this?

  1. I agree. It is a bit of a CATCH 22 when it comes to voting practices. But the problem is everything seems to be so slanted and one really has to sift through the “muck” to get to the principles and ideology of a candidate. Does it really matter what promises are made or how well the candidate debates amd speaks? The common voter waits for the general election and then votes according to the party ticket. But ironically, it is the ruthless campaigning, debating and promising that sways that independent vote… and thus making all the difference when the votes are tallied.

  2. Magnificent issues altogether, you simply won a new reader. What might you suggest in regards to your publish that you made some days in the past? Any positive?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *