While listening to the radio and watching TV, I keep hearing people say they want to vote for presidential Candidate A over Candidate B because A reminds these people of themselves. They will say things like, “he’s a normal person just like me,” or “I like him because he is simple and straight forward.” Very little is said, by these people, about the candidate’s values or issue areas. These evaluations are based primarily on personality.
Well, to the idea of voting for someone because they seem like a “normal person,” I have this to say, I don’t want a normal person in the White House. I want an extraordinary person in the White House. I do not want our president to be someone that I could see myself throwing a few beers back with (or doing lines of blow as the case may be). I want our presidential candidate to be so smart and thoughtful that I feel myself compelled to excellence merely by being in his (or her) presence. As much as I love having buddies to drink beers with, I do not need a pal in the president; I need someone with factually based answers to the problems that face America and when they do not have answers they seek out the best and brightest to find solutions.
Of course I want a president who’s political ideology matches my own, and political ideology is a complex thing with too many factors to discuss here but here is a list of things that it is not: dollars spend on a campaign, gender, ethnicity, age, attractiveness, height, and just about any other superficial measure that holds no bearing on the issues that a president must address.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Voting for Your “Pal”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Well said, well said.
I only wonder if this still a concern in the '08 election. I remember hearing during the '00 election that people found Gore "boring," and would rather vote for Bush because he seemed "relatable" and someone they could "have a few beers with." It's completely idiotic to vote on that basis, but I'll agree that Bush came off as more of a drinking buddy than Gore did, given Bush's goofy (okay, more like "stupid") disposition.
That said, I don't think any of the candidates running this time around are goofy, per se, or rely on "I didn't take academics seriously, and still party like a frat boy" charm. Some are charismatic, at best (e.g. Obama), but that's not necessarily indicative of a bad trait in a political leader.
At the same time, doesn't it make sense that a candidate should have some semblance of humanity, of something that I can understand on a human level? Specifically, I find one of the candidates to be so Machiavellian, so thick in duplicity and machinations, that she comes across as frightening. At least that's my current interpretation.
Post a Comment