Neil MacDonald is a senior CBC reporter and columnist; his piece on what he calls the "point and screech" election is worth reading, though it's unflattering. Unflattering in what reads to me like a fairly bi-partisan way, too.
t
Recalcitrant Heretic
Another outsider's view of the American election
Neil MacDonald is a senior CBC reporter and columnist; his piece on what he calls the "point and screech" election is worth reading, though it's unflattering. Unflattering in what reads to me like a fairly bi-partisan way, too.
t
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
homeslap
Re: Another outsider's view of the American election
Not just an opinion held by outsiders. Many here, including myself, feel similarly. I long for an honest and mature dialogue among both the candidates for president as well as the citizenry, errr. . .bilge rats. Alas, what we get most often is such as this: linkOriginally Posted by TomF
Admittedly I find it difficult to restrain myself from sinking to that level myself from time to time. I of course blame this on liberals.
I never learned from a man who agreed with me.
Trying to be reasonable
Re: Another outsider's view of the American election
Whoooop! Whooooop! False equivalence warning!!! Another journalist with a deadline to meet, trying to look evenhanded, and pretending the idiocy and extremism is equally distributed. "On the one hand, the Republicans intend to fully implement Jonathan Swift's Modest Proposal, on the other, Obama said something silly about Romney and Bin Laden. A terrible pity how American political discourse has gone down the tubes".
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
for nature cannot be fooled."
Richard Feynman
Recalcitrant Heretic
Re: Another outsider's view of the American election
Whoop Whoop indeed.
Keith, you and the whole Bilge know my opinions on the Republican primary debacles, the Republican filibustering and obstruction strategy, the "make Obama fail" mode of putting "Country First." Let's not get started on the Rep strategy in Congress right now to cut programs which benefit the poor, in order to protect defence spending. I frankly do not think there's equivalency.
But MacDonald accurately, to my eye, notes that the Dems have also dropped the level of discourse. That Obama - while to my mind infinitely preferable to any of the contenders on show these past months - sometimes panders to his base too.
The equivalency seems driven by what the public is willing to pay attention to, more even than by what this or that party puts on offer. People are more interested in Kardashian's butt than in social policy ... more interested in Entertainment Tonight or American Idol than discussing fair and just tradeoffs between complex international, economic, and social issues. To the extent that politics has descended into a mass entertainment rather than a mass discussion, it has failed. The Rep strategy acknowledges this, and seeks to "win" by working politics with Entertainment Tonight or American Idol rules ... success depends on branding and market share, not on the product quality. That's something which the Dems have not quite so entirely embraced ... which is why they still talk more about policy.
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Trying to be reasonable
Re: Another outsider's view of the American election
Read Obama's last couple of major speeches and tell me if you still think so.But MacDonald accurately, to my eye, notes that the Dems have also dropped the level of discourse.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
for nature cannot be fooled."
Richard Feynman
Recalcitrant Heretic
Re: Another outsider's view of the American election
Keith, the contrast between Obama's speeches and those on offer during the Republican primary season has been ... marked.
I do not think that a "gotcha" accusation that Romney wouldn't have had the guts to order Bin Laden's execution was seemly, or probably even accurate. No, this does not parallel the stuff we've heard over the months from Santorum, Ron Paul, or even Romney ... but it does nothing to raise the level of debate.
So I hear you - the two parties are not the same.
A great big part of the public, however, seems to not be able to see a meaningful difference. And is more interested in Kardashian's bum than in the minimal effort it might take to discern the difference between the two parties' approaches. More important, I think that the parties aren't even attempting to be in the same contest.
The Reps are looking to influence potential voters' mostly through "branding" and emotional motivation ... and are selling their product the way low/moderate quality mass-market consumer products are always sold. Politics as McFood, or McEntertainment, where the identity-experience is what's sold ... and the actual goods are secondary. In contrast, the Dems seem to think that facts and analysis will motivate people to vote - I'll vote for you if I think you've thought it through. And if I think you're smart enough to think the next problem through.
To my eye, it comes down to something like those early UFC fights, where a boxer would fight a judo guy ... and each would try to make the other guy fight outside his comfort zone. And each guy implicitly believes that not only is he a better fighter, but that his style is the better fighting style. And frankly isn't interested in understanding the other guy's style in any depth.
My bias is that democratic institutions rely on an informed electorate ... and that a meaningful election can't happen without fact-based discussions of real issues. But that's the Dem approach, and I'd be a Dem in your place. It is predicated on the idea that facts and clear analysis should be able to make one change a position (i.e. compromise) ... but that the guy who can demonstrate to voters that he's got the best head should be in the White House.
But the Rep bias at least since Reagan is to simply motivate voters, not to get tangled up in policy discussions. The main thing is to be in the decision-maker's seat; Policy will be made later, when you're in a position to actually have all the numbers clearly in hand. Policy is always fluid anyway, as those facts evolve. From a Rep perspective, the main thing is to win the election - and it would be stupid to try to win the election using anything less than the most effective means to sway votes. And voters will support a guy who makes them feel a particular way, not necessarily the guy who seems the smartest or to have the best command of "facts."
Last edited by TomF; 05-10-2012 at 08:44 AM.
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
member # 12650
Re: Another outsider's view of the American election
Uh, yes? But isn't this obvious?
Which is the exact reason that responsible commentators will stop pretending that there's any equivalence between the amount of obstruction coming from the Regressive side and that coming from the Progressive side.
“We have tracked the economic health of the nation for a long time. The reason we track those things is that the government is full of economists, not psychologists. If we know money doesn’t buy happiness, why are we optimizing for money?”
Adam Kramer, PhD candidate, Psychology, U. of OR.
Photographer of sailing and sailboats
And other things, too.
http://www.landsedgephoto.com
Recalcitrant Heretic
Re: Another outsider's view of the American election
If it were obvious, then wouldn't Dems stop expecting Reps to campaign by Dem rules, or bemoaning when they don't? I haven't seen that yet.
I have zero time and respect for the type of campaigning and Congressional obstruction we've seen from Reps - and I think it must be named that those tactics are predominantly on the Rep side. I think that even if they're successful (in terms of winning an election), they hurt the country terribly. And on this, I agree that there's no equivalence - the two sides are playing using different rules.
What I'm saying is that it's a Dem presupposition that both sides should be playing with the same rules. Paradoxically, by naming the different "fighting styles," shining a spotlight on what's different and why, you might find that enough of the public opens its eyes to reward playing by something closer to a common set of rules. I don't think people like to be manipulated, treated like sheep, once they see the manipulation occurring.
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
member # 12650
Re: Another outsider's view of the American election
Well, I don't agree. We're seeing just how much Regressive posturing is necessary for the current administration to start to reconcile itself to the possiblity that letting the Regressives hang themselves may not be a workable paradigm.
But - it's a catch 22. When someone bullies you (and there's no one to tattle to) you have only a few choices. You wring your hands, you bully back, you ignore, you walk away, or you lay a trap which may not spring in time.
Up to now the Dems have wrung their hands, sometimes in disbelief. Bullying back is not an option because it just causes you to lose credibility and lower yourself to the bully's level. Ignoring it has been the other part of the Dems response and the result of that was the war in Iraq, the destruction of the so-called Twin Towers, the increase of the danger of climate change, the collapse of the various bubbles which have crashed since Reagan, the expansion of the disparity in wealth, the descent of the middle class to lower class stature, the death of the only organizations which empowered laboring people and a host of other problems some of which are beginning to be noticed by some in the population.
Walking away is impossible as long as Democrats get elected to Congress.
And laying a trap is very slow to work.
It's about the only option left at this point and Mr. Obama has been doing it since he was elected. Part of that is attempting, over and over, to bring the Regressives to the table, so they can demonstrate for the upteenth time how much they simply will not do anything but bully. That part Mr. Obama has been consistently doing. The other part, using the much-touted "bully pulpit" to highlight the dilemma, is not possible because the line between that and bullying back (or its mirror image whining) is extremely delicate and the populace couldn't tell the difference if you made them sit in the President's chair.
Now there are things I wish he'd done - like getting the FCC to disable to Murdoch empire. It was the previous bully to put the finishing touches on permitting it and it needs to be disabled and crippled before any real change will happen in the problem sections of the country. Another thing I wish he'd done was start every bargain from a position of at least twice what he was willing to settle for - single-payer health care, a stimulus fund twice or more the size of what he thought he could get, a thoroughly progressive nominee to the Supremes, immediate elimination of DADT etc. All of these would be simply opening positions and the howls of self-righteousness from the Regressives would have revealed just how much they were cry-babies.
Instead, he appears to be willing to compromise before the opposition has shown its hand. Very unfortunate.
But here we are.
“We have tracked the economic health of the nation for a long time. The reason we track those things is that the government is full of economists, not psychologists. If we know money doesn’t buy happiness, why are we optimizing for money?”
Adam Kramer, PhD candidate, Psychology, U. of OR.
Photographer of sailing and sailboats
And other things, too.
http://www.landsedgephoto.com
Recalcitrant Heretic
Re: Another outsider's view of the American election
I could not agree more respecting the bargaining position stuff.
From here it has seemed like whatever the issue, Obama's opening position has been what he'd grudgingly accept as a final deal. He's given everything away before beginning - which has emboldened the other side to shift their opening position several steps the other way, if they entertain compromise at all.
I am hopeful that in his second term he will be far tougher. He has been, it seems, in recent months.
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Recalcitrant Heretic
Re: Another outsider's view of the American election
I also want to say that many Conservatives I know are appalled and embarassed by the direction the GOP's gone in recent years. The fact that they don't agree with the politics the Dems are offering is a major struggle for them, because they are quite shocked by the @sses supposedly providing an alternative.
I see this as a major tragedy for American political life, because healthy democratic institutions require at least two responsible, viable alternatives.
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
member # 12650
Re: Another outsider's view of the American election
Amazing. If they're uncomfortable with an uncompromising socially and economically completely destructive posture, how can they possibly also be uncomfortable with a center-right and economically equally destructive posture by Mr. Obama?
And this is where the Progressives start to see color bias.
(If it's not philosophical, what else could it be but bigotry?)
“We have tracked the economic health of the nation for a long time. The reason we track those things is that the government is full of economists, not psychologists. If we know money doesn’t buy happiness, why are we optimizing for money?”
Adam Kramer, PhD candidate, Psychology, U. of OR.
Photographer of sailing and sailboats
And other things, too.
http://www.landsedgephoto.com
Recalcitrant Heretic
Re: Another outsider's view of the American election
Some tell me they're voting for Obama, and did in 2008 for similar reasons. But are doing this ruefully - not trusting the Dems to continue to govern from the center out of anything but pragmatism.
You've got to admit, that's rational. Obama's being very pragmatic, moving the party into a vacuum in the center-Right.
But the Dems' umbrella goes as far Left as you have in the US. People can grudgingly acknowledge that Obama's own policies are actually in the center - acknowledge even that ObamaCare started life in a Right-wing think-tank. But they also know that Obama's support includes environmental activists, Occupy protesters, and people whose expressions of sexuality feel pretty repugnant to them. And they think - if Obama gets a majority in both houses, what's to reign in the rabble on the Left?
You and I have confidence that Obama is actually not about to cave to cross-dressing dreadlock-wearing barter-approving anarchist Goths ... but a lifelong Republican will not feel so confident. I don't think you have to be racist to be uncomfortable trusting that positions borne of pragmatism might not be durable.
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
member # 12650
Re: Another outsider's view of the American election
If they're serious, and not just pulling your gullible leg on this, then clearly they have no clue of where the Democrats really are philosophically in their own country. They must not have been following the tragic path of the party since the Southern democrats became Regressives, now 35 years ago. In addition, they must not understand how politics works on a national level here.
Any real Progressive knows that a truely progressive political platform has never been tried in the US. From Kennedy on, it's been an endless battle, requiring the murder of a President, to bring even the mildest programs for the support of the less fortunate, even the most temperate controls over the avarice and self-aggrandizement of American business, even the most obvious of pro-peace related positions, even the just-barely-equitable ideas about education and religion up in Congress. The tax code is a shambles because neither party is willing or able to tackle the job of weeding out the most offensive parts of it, our drug laws are neaderthal, more than 75% of Congress is unwilling to risk standing up to the Roman Catholic church and more than 80% is unwilling to call the Israelis what they are - tribal bullies no better than all the nations surrounding them. Our health care laws are beyond embarassing, especially in a nation which parades its love of babies all over its politics.
Anarchist Goths have no interest in politics.
“We have tracked the economic health of the nation for a long time. The reason we track those things is that the government is full of economists, not psychologists. If we know money doesn’t buy happiness, why are we optimizing for money?”
Adam Kramer, PhD candidate, Psychology, U. of OR.
Photographer of sailing and sailboats
And other things, too.
http://www.landsedgephoto.com
Senior Member
Re: Another outsider's view of the American election
Tom ,that has to be one of the best posts I've ever read here, well done ! Good points excellently articulated .
Perfect is the enemy of good.
Senior Member
Re: Another outsider's view of the American election
Someone in advertising would tell you that if they notice the manipulation the advertising is bad, good advertising fits into a complete preexisting experience of ideas and desires .People can be made to LIKE being manipulated if it reinforces exists prejudice or to use a less loaded word, preference.
Perfect is the enemy of good.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote