Home
Refresh   Tag(s): ; ; ;
Add to My Group
December 26, 2007 at 21:07:07

View Ratings | Rate It

Hillary vs. Kucinich: the battle for the Democratic Party

submit to twitter
submit to reddit
submit to digg

Tell A Friend

By Gustav Wynn (about the author)     Page 2 of 2 page(s)

opednews.com     Permalink

Individual voters are simply gullible - ask around the watercooler or at the local bar, not who their choices are but why. A new body of research presented Dr. Drew Westen's book The Political Brain" The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of a Nation shows convincing proof that Americans have voted with their hearts, not their heads for decades. One chapter shows that our brains shut down logic functions when shown proof that challenges beliefs we've previously held - for example, reciting John Kerry quotes that contradict each other to a staunch supporter, the logic centers in the subject's brain show no activity while the emotional centers flare like fire alarms, looking for rationalizations, excuses and comebacks.

Discussing issues meaningfully is often complex. The collective American psyche seeks black and white solutions and instant gratification. To understand a candidates' health care platform for example would require reading a long, detailed explanation. As a result, more media time is spent handicapping the race like a fantasy football league then discussing the candidates' stances on actual issues.

We also over-fixate on "electability" - that is, we see who's ahead and side with frontrunners because we are fearful of wasting our vote on a loser. After breaking down the demographics, learning who has what endorsements, noting candidates' religions, learning about their spouses, listening to a televised debate (or just highlight clips of one) we are seemingly prepared to vote. But seldom do we read up on the specifics of a candidates' position on issues. This is because the campaigns themselves often want to avoid the issues - they have a year-long media spectacle going, so why should they lock in to anything when they can just spout vague slogans?

So frontrunners have an advantage - they know you are reluctant to "waste your vote" on a better candidate who is behind in the polls. So they take you for granted. If we adopt a ranked-choice voting system (San Francisco just did so for it's recent mayoral election), we will get to cast not just one vote but votes for our 1st, 2nd and 3rd choices. If our first choice does not meet a minimum total, our 2nd choice candidate will recieve our support, and so on. This type of system has been proposed, but would be years away. Sadly, no national pollster has surveyed the country so far in ranked-choice-fashion to compare how drastically "electability" affects the actual race. You can bet Kucinich, Dodd, Biden, Richardson and Gravel would get quite a few more votes (and therefore contributions) in this system.

We should also look at how a cap on overall campaign spending would affect the races. In the UK for example, candidates and parties are allowed only a small sum for all campaign spending. In the US, our next president will spend over $100 million, with over $3 billion in total being spent on the '08 race, almost double what was spent in 2004 - and almost all going to big media who in turn spends much of it on lobbying and campaigns who will help them.

Small wonder Congress just gave big media a Christmas gift despite vehement public outcry - the deregulation package just passed by the FCC will allow Fox's News Corp, Time Warner and GE to own print, TV and radio stations all in the same markets and put up political "roadblocks" to free speech and independent media, just in time for the election frenzy in November.

Also sad is the concentration on Presidential elections, as opposed to Congressional or local politics. We know all about the Presidential candidates from their marriage problems to their UFO sightings, but many of us don't even know who our local Congressional Rep is, let alone how they have been voting in our name. If we concentrated as a country on electing 60 anti-war US senators, or a veto-proof majority of Congress members, it would hardly matter who the President was!

Next Page  1  |  2

 

rock-prog.org

(OpEdNews Editor) GW is a proud New Yorker, concerned about media manipulation and overconsumption. He believes in fiscal responsibility, small government and strict ethics. He recently changed careers to become an inner city schoolteacher. A firm (more...)
 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Follow Me on Twitter

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

FACEBOOK      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      NETSCAPE      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
7 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
 

What constitutes a "wasted vote" by Kathleen Bushman on Wednesday, Dec 26, 2007 at 11:50:16 PM
Americans a little less gullible. by bgodley on Thursday, Dec 27, 2007 at 2:07:03 AM
How to give out the info by zephyr on Thursday, Dec 27, 2007 at 2:19:41 AM
Move on from Moveon. by clsgis on Thursday, Dec 27, 2007 at 11:19:38 AM
THIS IS A ONE PARTY SYSTEM by RICHARD SHADE on Thursday, Dec 27, 2007 at 5:50:42 AM
Kucinich speaks for me! by treehugger on Thursday, Dec 27, 2007 at 5:54:46 AM
Money trumps everything.... by Gustav Wynn on Thursday, Dec 27, 2007 at 10:40:03 AM

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment


 

 

 

Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews

Powered by Populum