Re: Track record... yeah. One can look up Obama's record in the Illinois Senate, of course, but that doesn't really help me with one of my own big issues, which is foreign policy.
One of the things that's interesting to me about current politics is that track records seem to me to be as much a liability as a benefit. It points out the shelf life of the typical candidate's convictions (which in Romney's case is a liability, as you point out). But it's also a frequent liability to someone like McCain, since so many of our bills are overloaded these days. McCain, or anyone else, could vote against an energy bill that includes provisions for renewable resource research and a bridge over part of the desert in New Mexico. The candidate can then be painted anti-green or anti-pork, based on the track record. And since very few people get past the news sound-bites, they'll believe whatever news source they're listening to.
I think this is at the heart of why we haven't had a senator president in so long. Too much information that can be misconstrued. Of course, the way it's looking, that record will be broken this year no matter what.
***
What you say first is interesting to me, though. Since none of the likely candidates actually meet your four issues, how will you decide between them? Party loyalty? Do you have secondary issues? Do you have a gut feeling about which of your four are most important?
If things bounce badly, and I'm left with a choice between, say, Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney, I'll just stay home. Or maybe write in "None of the Above."
Secondary issues can pull my attention every once in a while. Like John McCain and campaign finance reform. Usually in a negative fashion. I have some very tough choices to make in a John McCain/Hillary Clinton race.
One of the things that's interesting to me about current politics is that track records seem to me to be as much a liability as a benefit. It points out the shelf life of the typical candidate's convictions (which in Romney's case is a liability, as you point out). But it's also a frequent liability to someone like McCain, since so many of our bills are overloaded these days. McCain, or anyone else, could vote against an energy bill that includes provisions for renewable resource research and a bridge over part of the desert in New Mexico. The candidate can then be painted anti-green or anti-pork, based on the track record. And since very few people get past the news sound-bites, they'll believe whatever news source they're listening to.
I think this is at the heart of why we haven't had a senator president in so long. Too much information that can be misconstrued. Of course, the way it's looking, that record will be broken this year no matter what.
***
What you say first is interesting to me, though. Since none of the likely candidates actually meet your four issues, how will you decide between them? Party loyalty? Do you have secondary issues? Do you have a gut feeling about which of your four are most important?
Reply
If things bounce badly, and I'm left with a choice between, say, Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney, I'll just stay home. Or maybe write in "None of the Above."
Secondary issues can pull my attention every once in a while. Like John McCain and campaign finance reform. Usually in a negative fashion. I have some very tough choices to make in a John McCain/Hillary Clinton race.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment