Chicken or Maverick...
October 23, 2008 5:50 AM Subscribe
Undecided, by David Sedaris— "To put them in perspective, I think of being on an airplane. The flight attendant comes down the aisle with her food cart and, eventually, parks it beside my seat. “Can I interest you in the chicken?” she asks. “Or would you prefer the platter of shit with bits of broken glass in it?”
To be undecided in this election is to pause for a moment and then ask how the chicken is cooked."
This post was deleted for the following reason: this is sort of turning into minutia American election filter here and maybe needs to go into an open election post? -- jessamyn
Insulting people is usually the best way to sway their opinion.
posted by proj at 5:56 AM on October 23, 2008
posted by proj at 5:56 AM on October 23, 2008
What makes you think he's talking to independents?
posted by oddman at 5:58 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by oddman at 5:58 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
I'm pretty sure he's writing for the good chunk of the population that knows what they want. Because really, who is still undecided at this point? Racists who are worried about their jobs?
Also, I don't think this really needs to be its on FPP. It's funny, but it's not the best thing ever.
posted by chunking express at 6:01 AM on October 23, 2008 [2 favorites]
Also, I don't think this really needs to be its on FPP. It's funny, but it's not the best thing ever.
posted by chunking express at 6:01 AM on October 23, 2008 [2 favorites]
Because really, who is still undecided at this point? Racists who are worried about their jobs?
You've just described about 6 billion people.
posted by kid ichorous at 6:04 AM on October 23, 2008 [4 favorites]
You've just described about 6 billion people.
posted by kid ichorous at 6:04 AM on October 23, 2008 [4 favorites]
I love David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim is one of the funniest things I've ever read - and no, I don't think a mostly anecdotal piece in the New Yorker is aimed at swaying undecideds. Seems more to me to be an expression of bafflement over how a person can be undecided, still, and insist that they don't see a real difference between Obama and McCain. That's what I took from it anyway.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:09 AM on October 23, 2008 [3 favorites]
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:09 AM on October 23, 2008 [3 favorites]
You've just described about 6 billion people.
hahahhaaa
posted by billybobtoo at 6:13 AM on October 23, 2008
hahahhaaa
posted by billybobtoo at 6:13 AM on October 23, 2008
Okay piece, lousy illustration, and I'm with chunking in thinking it's not really FPP material.
posted by Shepherd at 6:14 AM on October 23, 2008
posted by Shepherd at 6:14 AM on October 23, 2008
If that's what he thinks of undecideds, imagine the contempt he has for actual Republicans.
Actually, I could easily imagine he has more respect for them, because they at least have principle and an ability to make a decision. At this point, the candidates are astonishingly, clearly different, and it shouldn't be hard to choose one way or another. Theoretically if you're a McCain voter, you could imagine he's the chicken, and Obama the pile o' shit with glass shards.
I imagine it's akin to my contempt for holier-than-thou assholes who believe in a magical sky man and will preach gospel whether you want to hear it or not, but meanwhile don't actually live by it and cut you off in the church parking lot. In comparison, I find a certain respect for monks and clergy, because though I still find their beliefs silly, I find their devotion and piety inspiring.
posted by explosion at 6:14 AM on October 23, 2008 [3 favorites]
Actually, I could easily imagine he has more respect for them, because they at least have principle and an ability to make a decision. At this point, the candidates are astonishingly, clearly different, and it shouldn't be hard to choose one way or another. Theoretically if you're a McCain voter, you could imagine he's the chicken, and Obama the pile o' shit with glass shards.
I imagine it's akin to my contempt for holier-than-thou assholes who believe in a magical sky man and will preach gospel whether you want to hear it or not, but meanwhile don't actually live by it and cut you off in the church parking lot. In comparison, I find a certain respect for monks and clergy, because though I still find their beliefs silly, I find their devotion and piety inspiring.
posted by explosion at 6:14 AM on October 23, 2008 [3 favorites]
Well sadly, the platter of shit would be the only vegetarian option in his hypothetical.
posted by Abiezer at 6:17 AM on October 23, 2008 [3 favorites]
posted by Abiezer at 6:17 AM on October 23, 2008 [3 favorites]
Because really, who is still undecided at this point?
People who don't pay attention to the world around them. I'm serious, they exist and they aren't actually all stupid, just... I don't know how to describe it. Self-absorbed? Willfully ignorant? Completely disgusted with politics? I'm sure you all can come up with horrible insults to throw at them.
They seem to have the same sort of view that many radicals on either side of the spectrum have - that there isn't a real meaningful difference between candidates. No matter who they vote for, the political process is going to homogenize the actions of our leaders to a point where it doesn't matter who's in office, at least not from their narrow little view on the ground. And it is a narrow view they keep. They know no one who has been involved in the wars or that died in terrorist attacks and what do they know or care about what happens to people in other countries? The current political leadership just isn't meaningful to them.
When I try to prod them to at least get involved in local politics, it becomes a matter of, "It's just so much WORK keeping up with everything that's going on locally..."
Its kind of sad, really. I fight and fight to try and get them involved, but as long as they don't look beyond their own noses they won't care. And don't try blame their economic woes on one party or another, they still think it would turn out the same...
posted by cimbrog at 6:19 AM on October 23, 2008
People who don't pay attention to the world around them. I'm serious, they exist and they aren't actually all stupid, just... I don't know how to describe it. Self-absorbed? Willfully ignorant? Completely disgusted with politics? I'm sure you all can come up with horrible insults to throw at them.
They seem to have the same sort of view that many radicals on either side of the spectrum have - that there isn't a real meaningful difference between candidates. No matter who they vote for, the political process is going to homogenize the actions of our leaders to a point where it doesn't matter who's in office, at least not from their narrow little view on the ground. And it is a narrow view they keep. They know no one who has been involved in the wars or that died in terrorist attacks and what do they know or care about what happens to people in other countries? The current political leadership just isn't meaningful to them.
When I try to prod them to at least get involved in local politics, it becomes a matter of, "It's just so much WORK keeping up with everything that's going on locally..."
Its kind of sad, really. I fight and fight to try and get them involved, but as long as they don't look beyond their own noses they won't care. And don't try blame their economic woes on one party or another, they still think it would turn out the same...
posted by cimbrog at 6:19 AM on October 23, 2008
Well sadly, the platter of shit would be the only vegetarian option in his hypothetical.
Doesn't that rather depend on the diet of the donor?
posted by mandal at 6:20 AM on October 23, 2008
Doesn't that rather depend on the diet of the donor?
posted by mandal at 6:20 AM on October 23, 2008
So long as they didn't suffer too much pushing it out, mandal. Let's hope the broken glass was added after the fact.
posted by Abiezer at 6:21 AM on October 23, 2008
posted by Abiezer at 6:21 AM on October 23, 2008
Insulting people is usually the best way to sway their opinion.
It seems to me like he's just making an observation rather than actively trying to sway people. Although I'm also pretty mystified at how somebody can still be on the fence in this election.
posted by Slack-a-gogo at 6:25 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
It seems to me like he's just making an observation rather than actively trying to sway people. Although I'm also pretty mystified at how somebody can still be on the fence in this election.
posted by Slack-a-gogo at 6:25 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
Well sadly, the platter of shit would be the only vegetarian option in his hypothetical.
Hmm. Being an animal product, is shit vegan?
posted by dirtdirt at 6:29 AM on October 23, 2008
Hmm. Being an animal product, is shit vegan?
posted by dirtdirt at 6:29 AM on October 23, 2008
Being an animal product, is shit vegan?
Only if the producer maintained a vegan diet, and the product was gathered in the wild, as opposed to being factory farmed.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:40 AM on October 23, 2008
Only if the producer maintained a vegan diet, and the product was gathered in the wild, as opposed to being factory farmed.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:40 AM on October 23, 2008
Maybe the polltakers don't weed out people who don't give a fuck and aren't going to vote but are too ashamed to admit it. Maybe they don't take into account some small percentage of people who plan to spend the last week holed up in their homes reading and watching everything they can find about the candidates before making a fully informed decision. Those people, I might be able to understand being undecided about who they prefer.
But anyone who intends to vote and who has been looking at the candidates all along, thinking about the issues, and trying to decide, but still somehow cannot decide, is an idiot.
posted by pracowity at 6:42 AM on October 23, 2008
But anyone who intends to vote and who has been looking at the candidates all along, thinking about the issues, and trying to decide, but still somehow cannot decide, is an idiot.
posted by pracowity at 6:42 AM on October 23, 2008
David Sedaris and the rest of the Obamastians can go fuck themselves.
Obama's not perfect. He voted for telecom amnesty, for one. As I said on PoliticalFilter, the chicken has been dropped on the floor of the lavatory and stepped on a few times. Yes, Obama's better than what we've had, but he's sorely lacking in many areas.
posted by Eideteker at 6:42 AM on October 23, 2008
Obama's not perfect. He voted for telecom amnesty, for one. As I said on PoliticalFilter, the chicken has been dropped on the floor of the lavatory and stepped on a few times. Yes, Obama's better than what we've had, but he's sorely lacking in many areas.
posted by Eideteker at 6:42 AM on October 23, 2008
They're out there. There are people who will remain undecided until they walk into the booth and pull the lever. They're not particularly informed people, and they have decided at least the last four elections.
Working the phones this last few months has taught me that this piece is not far off the mark. Undecideds I talk to generally fall into one of these categories:
I'm totally preoccupied by physical illness, mental illness, family issues, financial issues, etc, and the election is a dim mumble on my personal horizon
I'm enthralled with the power of withholding my vote until the last minute so that I can be the subject of endless conversations and media pieces about me and/or aimed at swaying me
I think that the candidates are basically alike, "they're all the same," it's about "the lesser of two evils," etc. This is a profoundly ignorant view no matter how you slice it, and there's no way to pretty that up. The only way to state this with seriousness is not to know very much about the totally divergent party platforms or the power that Administration policy has to change daily lives.
I have been told that the political process is very serious and I take my responsibility seriously though I really don't know how to approach the choice of a candidate with confidence. I think I am supposed to do deep and detailed research into each candidate before I arrive at a decision. "I don't vote for the party, I vote for the person." I need to read websites, watch debates, and finally make a gut decision based on character or one or two issues I really care about, ignoring the other issues or the cumulative effect of a policy package. Platforms don't matter and the quality of the relationships of House, Senate, and Executive brance don't matter.
I haven't really thought about it. I don't follow politics that much because I don't see its relevance. I have an OK job and an OK life and politics bores me - instead I follow sports or work on my projects or hang out with my friends. I have hobbies and interests but I'm not that connected to my civic community - I don't really coach, volunteer, or get interested in local elections. Yeah, I know I'm supposed to vote, and I probably will, unless traffic is bad and I get home late or whatever. But yeah, I'll give it some thought, thanks.
Sedaris' chicken-or-shit conundrum pretty much nails the second and third categories of undecideds, who I would say together form the bulk of them. The only hope for the last category is that they might not vote at all. I feel most frustrated for my fourth category, who I see as just unskilled in critical thinking (they are often intelligent, interested, and well spoken but stuck on the idea that politics is about individuals and that one individual's strength of character can override the country's ills no matter the opposition). And I feel just plain depressed by the first category - not a night of calling goes by without speaking to some marginalized, ill, isolated person whose difficulties do seem to make politics pale by comparison....though of course, they are SO often related to politics (health insurance, Medicare, bankruptcy law, Social Security, ADA....)
posted by Miko at 6:42 AM on October 23, 2008 [11 favorites]
Working the phones this last few months has taught me that this piece is not far off the mark. Undecideds I talk to generally fall into one of these categories:
Sedaris' chicken-or-shit conundrum pretty much nails the second and third categories of undecideds, who I would say together form the bulk of them. The only hope for the last category is that they might not vote at all. I feel most frustrated for my fourth category, who I see as just unskilled in critical thinking (they are often intelligent, interested, and well spoken but stuck on the idea that politics is about individuals and that one individual's strength of character can override the country's ills no matter the opposition). And I feel just plain depressed by the first category - not a night of calling goes by without speaking to some marginalized, ill, isolated person whose difficulties do seem to make politics pale by comparison....though of course, they are SO often related to politics (health insurance, Medicare, bankruptcy law, Social Security, ADA....)
posted by Miko at 6:42 AM on October 23, 2008 [11 favorites]
dirtdirt: My vegan housemates tell me that humans can consent to have their bodily fluids consumed, and therefore, bodily fluids are at least potentially vegan. I would assume the same is true of shit.
posted by spaceman_spiff at 6:43 AM on October 23, 2008
posted by spaceman_spiff at 6:43 AM on October 23, 2008
Insulting people is usually the best way to sway their opinion.
I haven't noticed anyone becoming less stupid because we don't tell them they're stupid. Maybe it's time to try something else.
posted by Legomancer at 6:45 AM on October 23, 2008 [3 favorites]
I haven't noticed anyone becoming less stupid because we don't tell them they're stupid. Maybe it's time to try something else.
posted by Legomancer at 6:45 AM on October 23, 2008 [3 favorites]
One effect of scorning people for saying they won't vote is that they say they will vote, but are undecided.
posted by smackfu at 6:45 AM on October 23, 2008 [2 favorites]
posted by smackfu at 6:45 AM on October 23, 2008 [2 favorites]
Chicken or Maverick...
Cake or death?
posted by M.C. Lo-Carb! at 6:47 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
Cake or death?
posted by M.C. Lo-Carb! at 6:47 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
Yes, Obama's better than what we've had, but he's sorely lacking in many areas.
Who doesn't Obama isn't perfect? Do you have a viable alternative?
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:47 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
Who doesn't Obama isn't perfect? Do you have a viable alternative?
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:47 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
doesn't know
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:48 AM on October 23, 2008
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:48 AM on October 23, 2008
People are on the fence over this election because for the last (large part of their lives) they spent, on average, less than five minutes a week thinking about politics. I know, it seems impossible to us enlightened illuminati, but just bear with me while I try to get a little bit more inside their heads:
You are an undecided voter. For most of your life, your only contact with news has been a few tidbits on your morning rush hour radio station and perhaps a couple segments on the evening news. You usually skip through most of the newspaper, focusing on the Sports and Variety sections. At present, you're aware of three things-- 1) there is a war going on, perhaps two; 2) the economy is in the shitter; 3) there is an election between a black guy and an old guy.
If you had paid more attention to the news over the last eight years, you'd understand a little more about the history of the war and the economy, but all you know right now is that these are problems, the only solutions you hear are condensed into short, demagogic 30-second ads on TV. What's more, where the planks aren't blatantly contradictory they're so nuanced you really can't understand the difference between the two. You're a smart guy but without a healthy background in history, economics, and current affairs, there's no way you can rationally evaluate the competing plans.
Here's why I know you're a smart guy: you are well aware that you don't know shit about shit. Maybe 10% of America will make an informed choice on November 4th. Eighty percent will vote with their parents or their guts. The other 10% are folks like you who know just enough to realize they're in over their heads.
You're sitting down to dinner and the phone rings. There's a pollster on the line and she wants to know who you're voting for. The eighty-percenters and the ten percenters already have their answers prepared either by virtue of their guts or their massive, college-educated brains. You pause for a moment, thinking of the economy, the war, and all of your own personal woe. You feel lost, adrift. You feel undecided.
posted by The White Hat at 6:49 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
You are an undecided voter. For most of your life, your only contact with news has been a few tidbits on your morning rush hour radio station and perhaps a couple segments on the evening news. You usually skip through most of the newspaper, focusing on the Sports and Variety sections. At present, you're aware of three things-- 1) there is a war going on, perhaps two; 2) the economy is in the shitter; 3) there is an election between a black guy and an old guy.
If you had paid more attention to the news over the last eight years, you'd understand a little more about the history of the war and the economy, but all you know right now is that these are problems, the only solutions you hear are condensed into short, demagogic 30-second ads on TV. What's more, where the planks aren't blatantly contradictory they're so nuanced you really can't understand the difference between the two. You're a smart guy but without a healthy background in history, economics, and current affairs, there's no way you can rationally evaluate the competing plans.
Here's why I know you're a smart guy: you are well aware that you don't know shit about shit. Maybe 10% of America will make an informed choice on November 4th. Eighty percent will vote with their parents or their guts. The other 10% are folks like you who know just enough to realize they're in over their heads.
You're sitting down to dinner and the phone rings. There's a pollster on the line and she wants to know who you're voting for. The eighty-percenters and the ten percenters already have their answers prepared either by virtue of their guts or their massive, college-educated brains. You pause for a moment, thinking of the economy, the war, and all of your own personal woe. You feel lost, adrift. You feel undecided.
posted by The White Hat at 6:49 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
Me Vote Pretty Some Day!
posted by fixedgear at 6:49 AM on October 23, 2008 [3 favorites]
posted by fixedgear at 6:49 AM on October 23, 2008 [3 favorites]
Thanks, Miko. When I read Sedaris's piece last night I thought it was funny, but I wondered why, seriously, some people who apparently intend to vote remain undecided so long.
posted by beagle at 6:50 AM on October 23, 2008
posted by beagle at 6:50 AM on October 23, 2008
Perfect is the enemy of good, my friends!
posted by Mister_A at 6:50 AM on October 23, 2008 [4 favorites]
posted by Mister_A at 6:50 AM on October 23, 2008 [4 favorites]
Chicken or Maverick...
Cake or death?
Bad or Worse?
posted by Slack-a-gogo at 6:56 AM on October 23, 2008
Cake or death?
Bad or Worse?
posted by Slack-a-gogo at 6:56 AM on October 23, 2008
Chicken or Maverick...
Cake or death?
Death by umbongo? Maybe that's what worries the undecided.
posted by mandal at 6:56 AM on October 23, 2008
Cake or death?
Death by umbongo? Maybe that's what worries the undecided.
posted by mandal at 6:56 AM on October 23, 2008
Yes, Obama's better than what we've had, but he's sorely lacking in many areas.
For fuck's sake, no one is perfect. Even Jesus Christ lost his temper a few times, and I believe he wrecked up a market or something like that?
Obama is the best, most potential-filled candidate that I have seen in my 26 years, and that includes both Clintons, and Al Gore. He will be inheriting a god-awful mess, and I hope that he's able to handle it well enough with skillful triage that he doesn't get blamed for the country still being suboptimal in 4 years, as it's gonna take a longer time to undo America's problems than just 4 years.
Did you ever stop to think that the near-worship of Obama is coming from the fact that a lot of people haven't had ANYONE to look up to in a long, long time? People of my generation haven't had presidents like Kennedy or Roosevelt (either or both). We didn't get genuine heroes like Eisenhower. In my lifetime, I've had Reaganomics, an FBI spook of an elder Bush (who I respect for recognizing the need to raise taxes after all, but little else), a competent, but irreverent and philandering Clinton, and a bumbling fool in Bush the W.
It's not just hope that America will get better, but hope that our president will be a noble, likable, well-spoken statesman who leads by positive example rather than dictates via negative consequences.
posted by explosion at 6:57 AM on October 23, 2008 [8 favorites]
For fuck's sake, no one is perfect. Even Jesus Christ lost his temper a few times, and I believe he wrecked up a market or something like that?
Obama is the best, most potential-filled candidate that I have seen in my 26 years, and that includes both Clintons, and Al Gore. He will be inheriting a god-awful mess, and I hope that he's able to handle it well enough with skillful triage that he doesn't get blamed for the country still being suboptimal in 4 years, as it's gonna take a longer time to undo America's problems than just 4 years.
Did you ever stop to think that the near-worship of Obama is coming from the fact that a lot of people haven't had ANYONE to look up to in a long, long time? People of my generation haven't had presidents like Kennedy or Roosevelt (either or both). We didn't get genuine heroes like Eisenhower. In my lifetime, I've had Reaganomics, an FBI spook of an elder Bush (who I respect for recognizing the need to raise taxes after all, but little else), a competent, but irreverent and philandering Clinton, and a bumbling fool in Bush the W.
It's not just hope that America will get better, but hope that our president will be a noble, likable, well-spoken statesman who leads by positive example rather than dictates via negative consequences.
posted by explosion at 6:57 AM on October 23, 2008 [8 favorites]
Cake or death? (Thanks for reminding me about that MCLoCarb!)
posted by nax at 6:57 AM on October 23, 2008
posted by nax at 6:57 AM on October 23, 2008
Every other single link political post has been removed. I like Sedaris, but then I also like Orson Scott Card, but really don't see much of a difference between these posts.
posted by cjorgensen at 6:58 AM on October 23, 2008
posted by cjorgensen at 6:58 AM on October 23, 2008
Whats the big deal? Undecided? Stay home. I dont see the ethic in the idea that everyone must vote. If these people are not interested in politics then we shouldnt demand they suddenly develop a sophisticated opinion. Let them go back to reality tv and TMZ reruns.
posted by damn dirty ape at 7:00 AM on October 23, 2008
posted by damn dirty ape at 7:00 AM on October 23, 2008
... Because really, who is still undecided at this point?
... also pretty mystified at how somebody can still be on the fence in this election.
Because, you see, everyone isn't like you and your cocoon of friends and acquaintances. But is it really that hard to understand that a person have difficulty choosing between Senator McCain (I don't have to list his negatives here, do I? Didn't think so.) and Senator Obama, who has fuck all in the way of executive experience and for whom his first presidential term would be longest job he's held in his life, and with whom one might (and you're going to have to stretch here, but work with me) have have disagreements with on policy issues, and trouble believing him on his positions you might share.
For a significant number of people, I'd guess it's an unappealing choice between two shit sandwiches. And, before everyone gets too worked up, this does not not, as it happens, describe me, who's been working an Obama phone bank these past few weekends.
posted by mojohand at 7:00 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
... also pretty mystified at how somebody can still be on the fence in this election.
Because, you see, everyone isn't like you and your cocoon of friends and acquaintances. But is it really that hard to understand that a person have difficulty choosing between Senator McCain (I don't have to list his negatives here, do I? Didn't think so.) and Senator Obama, who has fuck all in the way of executive experience and for whom his first presidential term would be longest job he's held in his life, and with whom one might (and you're going to have to stretch here, but work with me) have have disagreements with on policy issues, and trouble believing him on his positions you might share.
For a significant number of people, I'd guess it's an unappealing choice between two shit sandwiches. And, before everyone gets too worked up, this does not not, as it happens, describe me, who's been working an Obama phone bank these past few weekends.
posted by mojohand at 7:00 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
Bad or Worse?
Obama is only the "bad" compared to McCain's "worse" to people who want to eliminate the FDA.
posted by DU at 7:03 AM on October 23, 2008
Obama is only the "bad" compared to McCain's "worse" to people who want to eliminate the FDA.
posted by DU at 7:03 AM on October 23, 2008
I am glad this was a fpp. I wouldn't have found it otherwise. Thanks!
posted by wires at 7:04 AM on October 23, 2008
posted by wires at 7:04 AM on October 23, 2008
Every other single link political post has been removed.
Not true at all. There were two yesterday alone, and they're still there.
posted by rokusan at 7:05 AM on October 23, 2008
Not true at all. There were two yesterday alone, and they're still there.
posted by rokusan at 7:05 AM on October 23, 2008
I'm not undecided, but I am disenfranchised. Wake me when they give us Canadians the vote in your country.
posted by blue_beetle at 7:05 AM on October 23, 2008
posted by blue_beetle at 7:05 AM on October 23, 2008
Whats the big deal? Undecided? Stay home. I dont see the ethic in the idea that everyone must vote. If these people are not interested in politics then we shouldnt demand they suddenly develop a sophisticated opinion.
The deal is that they just won't do that. They're not apathetic folks, they're not saying, "You know what? I'm not voting this year." They're not declining interviews and polls. They're saying, "I'm voting, and I want your attention."
They're playing a horrible political game of hard-to-get. If they don't want to vote, that's fine. However, anyone who has registered to vote and actually plans to vote should already have a pretty decent idea of how they're voting. Telling ABC News that you support McCain doesn't mean you can't change your mind in November. But how the hell can you be on the fence at this point without being willfully ignorant or purposely enigmatic?
posted by explosion at 7:06 AM on October 23, 2008
Obama is the best, most potential-filled candidate...
I'd like to second this from maybe a slightly different perspective. Don't even look at the issues or listen to the speeches. Just watch the campaign. They are running a record-breaking, public-empowering campaign like absolute clockwork while hardly breaking a sweat. They didn't lose their cool over New Hampshire. They didn't lose their cool over Palin. They didn't lose their cool over Wall Street.
This guy is a genius. And not just a genius, but a genius at picking other other geniuses and letting them Do It Right. I wish we could have him for more than 8 years, because we really need it.
posted by DU at 7:07 AM on October 23, 2008 [5 favorites]
I'd like to second this from maybe a slightly different perspective. Don't even look at the issues or listen to the speeches. Just watch the campaign. They are running a record-breaking, public-empowering campaign like absolute clockwork while hardly breaking a sweat. They didn't lose their cool over New Hampshire. They didn't lose their cool over Palin. They didn't lose their cool over Wall Street.
This guy is a genius. And not just a genius, but a genius at picking other other geniuses and letting them Do It Right. I wish we could have him for more than 8 years, because we really need it.
posted by DU at 7:07 AM on October 23, 2008 [5 favorites]
Because really, who is still undecided at this point? Racists who are worried about their jobs?
As ever, when one would rather not stoop to actual arguments, painting those who disagree with you as bigots is equally acceptable.
posted by Inspector.Gadget at 7:10 AM on October 23, 2008
As ever, when one would rather not stoop to actual arguments, painting those who disagree with you as bigots is equally acceptable.
posted by Inspector.Gadget at 7:10 AM on October 23, 2008
Obama's not perfect. He voted for telecom amnesty, for one. As I said on PoliticalFilter, the chicken has been dropped on the floor of the lavatory and stepped on a few times. Yes, Obama's better than what we've had, but he's sorely lacking in many areas.
posted by Eideteker at 6:42 AM on October 23
Let it go, sweetie.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 7:10 AM on October 23, 2008
posted by Eideteker at 6:42 AM on October 23
Let it go, sweetie.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 7:10 AM on October 23, 2008
Senator Obama, who has fuck all in the way of executive experience
This is the biggest crock of shit argument ever, and I don't know why it's become a meme this cycle. Besides the fact that a senator is essentially an executive of their entire office of staff, our country has a decent history of non-executive presidents. Including notable ones like JFK and Lincoln. That's right, Lincoln, junior senator from Illinois, derided for lack of experience, and unpopular in the South.
I may start worrying if Obama decides to grow a beard or attending the theatre.
posted by explosion at 7:12 AM on October 23, 2008 [3 favorites]
This is the biggest crock of shit argument ever, and I don't know why it's become a meme this cycle. Besides the fact that a senator is essentially an executive of their entire office of staff, our country has a decent history of non-executive presidents. Including notable ones like JFK and Lincoln. That's right, Lincoln, junior senator from Illinois, derided for lack of experience, and unpopular in the South.
I may start worrying if Obama decides to grow a beard or attending the theatre.
posted by explosion at 7:12 AM on October 23, 2008 [3 favorites]
If you can look at Obama and McCain and not point at Obama and say "I'll have some of that, please", I don't know what's wrong with you.
And shit, I'm one of those "they're more alike than different" people.
posted by Pope Guilty at 7:12 AM on October 23, 2008
And shit, I'm one of those "they're more alike than different" people.
posted by Pope Guilty at 7:12 AM on October 23, 2008
mildly amusing comment by an interesting person. ElectionFilter.
posted by theora55 at 7:16 AM on October 23, 2008
posted by theora55 at 7:16 AM on October 23, 2008
and with whom one might (and you're going to have to stretch here, but work with me) have have disagreements with on policy issues, and trouble believing him on his positions you might share
Because — other than Obama being a Muslim, socialist, fascist, anti-American terrorist with ties to the Syrian Mafia and 60s hippies, and I just got this email that he's someone who wasn't even born in the United States! — there have really been numerous reality-based "disagreements" with "policy issues" presented to undecideds since the Democratic primaries. I mean, there was a real wealth of fact checking and correction done after Joe the Plumber. Can we afford to hand our country over to a filthy, turban-wearing Soviet commie who will take away 92% of your paycheck?
I sympathize for people on the fence, if only because the MSM feeds them so much racist garbage about Obama. I wouldn't be surprised if undecideds still voted for McCain at this point. Garbage-in, garbage-out.
The reason there aren't any factual, reality-based criticisms of Obama's policy is because the Right supports those same items on which they would otherwise have a good reason to criticize him for (e.g., FISA, vouchers). It would be too embarassing.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 7:19 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
Because — other than Obama being a Muslim, socialist, fascist, anti-American terrorist with ties to the Syrian Mafia and 60s hippies, and I just got this email that he's someone who wasn't even born in the United States! — there have really been numerous reality-based "disagreements" with "policy issues" presented to undecideds since the Democratic primaries. I mean, there was a real wealth of fact checking and correction done after Joe the Plumber. Can we afford to hand our country over to a filthy, turban-wearing Soviet commie who will take away 92% of your paycheck?
I sympathize for people on the fence, if only because the MSM feeds them so much racist garbage about Obama. I wouldn't be surprised if undecideds still voted for McCain at this point. Garbage-in, garbage-out.
The reason there aren't any factual, reality-based criticisms of Obama's policy is because the Right supports those same items on which they would otherwise have a good reason to criticize him for (e.g., FISA, vouchers). It would be too embarassing.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 7:19 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
The Republican upper crust has been rattled by the tremors of this coming economic collapse and figure that since they've taken a such huge haul from the economy over the last 8 years (war profiteering, corporate management fraud and short term investments), they'll just sit it out this time.
They've infiltrated all the government's legal and regulatory agencies and if they can collude with a few "centrist" Democrats to obstruct investigation into past crimes, then they'll be happy to tear down the new government from the sidelines and rebuild their brand.
posted by bonobothegreat at 7:20 AM on October 23, 2008
They've infiltrated all the government's legal and regulatory agencies and if they can collude with a few "centrist" Democrats to obstruct investigation into past crimes, then they'll be happy to tear down the new government from the sidelines and rebuild their brand.
posted by bonobothegreat at 7:20 AM on October 23, 2008
When I find out how other people making their voting decisions, it makes me weep. Hunters, for example, who won't vote for Obama for no reason except the nonsense that he want to raise taxes on ammo 500 percent -- a lie, and easily fact-checked. But believing the lie, and not checking the facts, makes everything easy. No other research is necessary. No other issues need be considered.
And these people may talk a good game about it being an essential right and the need for guns to protect us from the abuses of government, but it's bullshit. They're hunters. They're afraid Obama is going to take away their ability to shoot deer. So they have privileged their hobby above all other factors in deciding who runs the free world. They literally make their decisions based on who supports or does not support my leisure time activities. And they don't care if the person actually supports it or not. Say Obama is for gun control and there is a huge chunk of the population who will automatically not vote for him, even though his gun control stance will in no way interfere with hunters.
And then there are the people who treat politics like sports. They have their team, and they support their team, right or wrong, and they feel their participation in politics is to vote for their party and otherwise to talk trash about the other party. They get on Web pages and make shrill, hateful comments about politicians who don't belong to their party, and refer to Democrats as moonbats or Repupblicans as republutards. They create Web pages that are nothing but exercises in conformation bias, listing missteps by opposing party members, and each story gets 500 comments, but they're really all one comment, a thoughtless and braying cheer for their team. We can't count on these voters to make a reasoned choice, and more than we can count on Manchester United football thugs to suddenly start rooting for West Ham.
We can't trust people to research their candidates. That's why our attack ads are rooted in playing up to people's prejudices -- look at the preponderance of conservative ads right now claiming liberals will raise taxes. Because that's another single-issue that you can panic voters about, and liberals are already painted as "tax and spend," and a huge population of this country has somehow convinced themselves that taxes are inherently unjust. And these people will vote, and their vote will count as much as yours.
Democracy fails again and again, because it's rooted in an ideal -- that of an informed electorate capable of parsing truth from falsehood and the valuable from the valueless in the marketplace of ideas. But we're not that. We're lazy voters, and, if you tell us Obama is a Muslim, people will not vote for him, even though it's not true. As it happens, he is hugely charismatic, and McCain isn't, and we've had eight years of Republican rule that most Americans find disastrous, and so many of them will use their votes as a protest against the previous administration.
I would say scrap it all and develop a system that rewards intelligence and merit, but I have never seen such a system anyplace on earth? Why should I expect it in politics. At least, with democracy, I get to cancel out the vote of an idiot. So it has that going for it.
posted by Astro Zombie at 7:20 AM on October 23, 2008 [4 favorites]
And these people may talk a good game about it being an essential right and the need for guns to protect us from the abuses of government, but it's bullshit. They're hunters. They're afraid Obama is going to take away their ability to shoot deer. So they have privileged their hobby above all other factors in deciding who runs the free world. They literally make their decisions based on who supports or does not support my leisure time activities. And they don't care if the person actually supports it or not. Say Obama is for gun control and there is a huge chunk of the population who will automatically not vote for him, even though his gun control stance will in no way interfere with hunters.
And then there are the people who treat politics like sports. They have their team, and they support their team, right or wrong, and they feel their participation in politics is to vote for their party and otherwise to talk trash about the other party. They get on Web pages and make shrill, hateful comments about politicians who don't belong to their party, and refer to Democrats as moonbats or Repupblicans as republutards. They create Web pages that are nothing but exercises in conformation bias, listing missteps by opposing party members, and each story gets 500 comments, but they're really all one comment, a thoughtless and braying cheer for their team. We can't count on these voters to make a reasoned choice, and more than we can count on Manchester United football thugs to suddenly start rooting for West Ham.
We can't trust people to research their candidates. That's why our attack ads are rooted in playing up to people's prejudices -- look at the preponderance of conservative ads right now claiming liberals will raise taxes. Because that's another single-issue that you can panic voters about, and liberals are already painted as "tax and spend," and a huge population of this country has somehow convinced themselves that taxes are inherently unjust. And these people will vote, and their vote will count as much as yours.
Democracy fails again and again, because it's rooted in an ideal -- that of an informed electorate capable of parsing truth from falsehood and the valuable from the valueless in the marketplace of ideas. But we're not that. We're lazy voters, and, if you tell us Obama is a Muslim, people will not vote for him, even though it's not true. As it happens, he is hugely charismatic, and McCain isn't, and we've had eight years of Republican rule that most Americans find disastrous, and so many of them will use their votes as a protest against the previous administration.
I would say scrap it all and develop a system that rewards intelligence and merit, but I have never seen such a system anyplace on earth? Why should I expect it in politics. At least, with democracy, I get to cancel out the vote of an idiot. So it has that going for it.
posted by Astro Zombie at 7:20 AM on October 23, 2008 [4 favorites]
Honestly, I really am undecided. I want what's best for all of us. But what is best for all of us?
IMHO, Obama doesn't have the experience necessary to be our chief executive, and I don't like many of his positions. And all the Obama-worship is sorta scary. I like him, he's great, but he's not the second coming. OTOH, McCain is a bit of a hothead, and has on occasion shown bad judgment. He's running a nasty campaign. Don't get me started on Biden and Palin.
I know I'd vote for either Hillary or Colin Powell over either of them. (I know Powell screwed up in front of the UN, and he endorsed Obama, but that doesn't sway me--I still like the guy). I don't feel like we are being given our best options, or at least I'm not.
posted by MarshallPoe at 7:20 AM on October 23, 2008
IMHO, Obama doesn't have the experience necessary to be our chief executive, and I don't like many of his positions. And all the Obama-worship is sorta scary. I like him, he's great, but he's not the second coming. OTOH, McCain is a bit of a hothead, and has on occasion shown bad judgment. He's running a nasty campaign. Don't get me started on Biden and Palin.
I know I'd vote for either Hillary or Colin Powell over either of them. (I know Powell screwed up in front of the UN, and he endorsed Obama, but that doesn't sway me--I still like the guy). I don't feel like we are being given our best options, or at least I'm not.
posted by MarshallPoe at 7:20 AM on October 23, 2008
« Older Long Exposure | eCycling. Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by smackfu at 5:52 AM on October 23, 2008 [2 favorites]