Sunday, October 26, 2008

Coldplay:The Politics of 'Double-Dipping'

Coldplay was on SNL this weekend, they were awesome.
The singer was a little weird. 
Amy Poller had her baby.
It was weird watching Weekend Update without her. 

I used to hate reporters.  I don't like how hateful some of them are.
Then I started to like some that made me laugh.
So I started to pay a little more attention to the presidential campaigns.

Before I get into this let me just say that I don't consider myself republican or democrat.  I like some of the things that each candidate is pitching (whether or not it is in line with their party) but it just comes down to if I believe the nice things they are saying are really TRUE about the kind of administration they would make. So in this race I have been paying very close attention to character.

I like clearly stated policies.
I like campaign ads that educate me on a candidates own position on relevant issues.

Here's what I don't like.
*Omissions (if there is something potentially scandalous then just get it out and explain it, don't let the media discover it [unless you are guilty, in which case I hope the media nails you to the wall in front of the whole nation, and you end up serving as a warning to other corrupt leaders])
*making inappropriate faces and unfairly associated fear based labels
*blatantly avoiding direct questions with talking points
*not having a clear stance on the issues because you spend all your time criticizing your opponents issues
*distracting people from a lack of strong stance on issues by accusing the opposition of focusing on non-issues
*raising non-issues by saying that 'we're not going to raise non-issues'
*trying to win an election by appealing to the apathetic demographic with fear based accusations that the apathetic demographic will not fact-check or catch a retraction.  
*insisting on a caricature to represent the masses when the person that the caricature was based on misrepresented himself and would actually do better under your opponents plan
*combating a shocking and relevant endorsement with five irrelevant endorsements
*picking a running-mate based on election strategy versus having the readiness to lead the country in a time of historical crisis

Here's a funny one that deserved it's own paragraph.
Let's say that I'm running my campaign on the grounds of perfect social etiquette. 
Then I am caught double-dipping.  
I redirect away from the issue by saying that my opponent's party did it too and I have a right to double-dip, in fact double-dipping only proves that I'm a regular joe because hey let's face it, we've all double-dipped.
Then I further redirect the focus by saying that chips and dip are a great thing and when I am elected I will make sacrifices to ensure that there will always be dip with chips and I will defend everyone's right to have dip with their chips.

I guess the biggest thing that bothers me is the perception that the identity of the campaign is based off of polarizing against your opponent or a trial-and-error tactic.
I would hope that someone pursuing the presidency had one clear idea about each policy issue and reinforce it rather than making it up as you try to find what will help you win.

It's not about winning, it's about leading the country.

No comments: