Getting Political

Since my last blog, detailing the nuances of politician-talk, was met with considerable acclaim (one person responded with a comment, and I happened to be married to her), and since the very future of our country, economy, and our freedom to yell 'COCKROACH!!!" in a crowded theater is at stake (Shouting 'FIRE' in a theater is illegal, unless you happen to be watching 'Shrek: The Musical, in which case you'd be doing everyone a favor), I thought I'd delineate those people who will be voting in this upcoming election. Regardless of what vote you cast, these will be the fools you're going up against.

PARTISIAN VOTERS: These are the individuals who cannot 'see the forest for the trees'. Regardless of character, position, opinion or even whether they are capable of thinking, partisian voters will always cast a ballot for their party's nominee. Never mind the fact that parties change philosophies and stances from time to time: if your party is for 'it', so shall you vote for 'it'. For example, in the matter of slavery, it was actually the Republicans who supported Emancipation (Ashley, Sumner), aided only by one Democrat (Henderson).

This is the same party that would later elect Strom Thurmond (NC) to the Senate, who switched from Democrat to Republican after expressing disgust at the Civil Rights movement. This was a senator whom, as the venerable Wikipedia points out: 'Throughout the 1960s, Thurmond generally received relatively low marks from the press and his fellow Senators in the performance of his Senate duties, as he often missed votes and rarely proposed or sponsored noteworthy legislation.'

Character? Courage? Conviction? Um... only if my party says it's okay.

SINGLE ISSUE VOTERS: These are the voters who are so singularly focused on one political issue that they cannot- 'in good conscience'- vote for anyone else if it opposes their viewpoint, despite the fact that their views are in line with the opponent all the way down to... that single, critical issue. Example:

Candidate's stance:
WAR- Bad
ECONOMY- Needs work
HEALTH CARE- A darn good idea
FISHING OR HUNTING WITHOUT A LICENSE: punishable by death
TAXATION: Cut 'em. Let's see a big screen HDTV in every home in America
'IFFY' ON ABORTION: 'Rot in HELL, you fetus-murdering badger!'

Result: The putative forerunner is dismissed, Al Gore is elected in a landslide, and his entire administration is dedicated to providing air conditioning for polar bears and penguins.

APPEARANCE VOTERS: In 1960, Richard 'Tricky-Dick' Nixon was running for president against the fresh-faced brat from Massachusetts, John Fitzgerald Kennedy. Coincidentally, John F. Kennedy was also running for president against Richard Nixon, which made things very convenient for the voter.

Unlike now, when presidential debates are limited to three (given our shart attention span), Nixon and Kennedy agreed to a series of four debates. What set these debates apart were that they would be televised: the first ever for a presidential debate. Nixon, having recently recovered from a rather lame injury, refused to take time away from campaigning to have a facial done. Or get some sleep. Moreover, on the night of the debate he refused to wear make-up, not wanting to appear... well... gay. Kennedy had no such reservations, and welcomed having his cheeks rouged, thus indicating that he was courting the 'in-the-closet-crossdressing' demographic.

Given his injury, his active campaigning up until a few hours of the debate, and his refusal to wear make-up, Nixon looked haggard and worn during the event. Not that he wasn't on top of his game: people who had listened to the debate on the radio- as opposed to that 'talking-picture box'- felt that he had won the debate. Those watching on TV, however, felt differently. Sweating profusely, looking exhausted, and with a 5 o'clock shadow, Nixon took Kennedy on. However, a rested, tan and 'pancaked and rouged' Kennedy looked scrum-delly-licious to viewers, and the consensus of the TV viewers was that Kennedy won the debate. He had been lagging slightly in the polls until then, but with the novelty of that 'talky-box', Kennedy pulled slightly ahead and eventually won. Slightly. Nixon suspected voter fraud, but unwisely did not suspect Florida, which has managed to botch every single election since.

The moral of the story is that there will be those who- with no understanding of the issues at stake- will vote for the candidate that is 'cuter'. What, you think McCain picked Palin because she was bright?

I VOTE THE CANDIDATE, NOT THE PARTY: Lordy, this sounds good. People who are willing to listen to what each candidate has to say. Wants to view their stance on issues. Hear their proposed solutions. Dis-regard the attack ads sway that try and sway them one way or the other ('McCain has a record of always voting for the wrong thing.' 'Yeah? Well Obama has a record of barely voting!!!').

The trouble with these people- of which I am one- are that they are the ones who really decide the election (Spoiler: I've since decided, unless one of them has the bright idea of spreading our military out even further, and wants to invade Canada. Or cut taxes to corporations on the off-chance that they might use that revenue to keep jobs here in America, rather than using those gains to build manufacturing plants in countries whose name the average American can't pronounce and whose average workforce age is about 12. Oops. Guess I gave that one away).

They are the Missouri-ans, the 'Show-Me' crowd, who don't get excited at balloons dropping from the ceiling at conventions. They want answers, solutions, a course of direction. They won't mind someone who's 'anti-gun' if they're 'pro-education'. They won't require a candidate stand against Roe v. Wade (which will never be overturned anyway) if they're also for fiscal responsibility. There's give and take in politics- a weighing against the lesser of evils, or of the good and the better. They are the gray ones, who refuse to see things in black-and-white because they know (usually from bitter experience) that very few things are that way.

It is they- and not George Dubya- that are the Deciders, and God grant them wisdom come November.