Verified:

archaic Game profile

Member
7023

Mar 23rd 2012, 14:38:29

they're perfectly happy to take my tax dollars and ignore me, they've proven that.

DH, the easy (lol!) solution to the money in Washington is restricting ALL elected offices to a single term. I wonder how much more courage a politician would have if their re-election could not be bought.
Cheating Mod Hall of Shame: Dark Morbid, Turtle Crawler, Sov

trumper Game profile

Member
1559

Mar 23rd 2012, 14:57:13

Originally posted by Ruthie:


Frankly I think we should just vote in those we feel would do a better job, and whose philosopy matches our own. Why the hell do we still need two sides of the fence to rule one country? All they do is argue with each other and get nothing done.

I am sick of democrats/republicans bashing each other and their ideas just because of which party they represent.


I agree with you overall sentiment and I will give my very cynical inside view of how and why the current system works the way it does.

Don't think about philosophy, ideals, values, etc--think about campaigns as strictly a product. Imagine for a second you're the salesman except you're not driven by profit, you're driven by the most people (or in many cases a majority +1 vote) selecting your product. You may not have the shiniest display, best taste, or even the best after effect, but all you need is to give the right reason to move the consumer into your category.

Sometimes you can have the best product on the shelf, but the circle R or D is diminished because everyone hates the bigger product with the same circle or someone with the same circle had a scandal (ergo 2006 people didn't like Bush, Mark Foley scandal, etc or 2010 people didn't like Obama, health care, etc). Now the question becomes you have a limited budget and you know that it's a tight selection process. Do you spend your advertising dollars saying I'm the right guy to get the job done, look at my record, etc or do you spend the dollars saying "this guy once voted for a tax hike, can you trust him?" If you're in a nationalized race, the reality is you have poll tested this and the general public will be moved by the latter and not the former.

Whether people think that's right or wrong is sort of irrelevant until enough people stop shifting their votes because of said advertising. In the end of the day, the people who change the most are the disenfranchised so-called 'middle' and they do it on often more macro issues. So that's why you will see both sides approaching campaigns with two objectives:
1) Move the guy in the middle over to buy your product
2) Motivate your base to come out by declaring the other guy as the end of the world

I find it sad, but I don't expect it to change anytime soon.