Quote:
|
it is entirely possible that a whole range of caculations (based on increasingly superficial information, but such is the way modern poltics goes) would sit behind such decisions, and it is somewhere between naieve and patronizing of you to assume that the situation is otherwise.
|
You would have a point if the following statement was made, "I am voting for Kerry because of X, Y and Z." not "I am voting for any Democrat hoping he beats Bush." (i.e. the Green Party V.P. candidate)
I am just not seeing these calculations that you refer to. I am only seeing emotion. Instead of telling me how bad Bush is, tell me why Kerry would make a better president. (that statement is not made to anyone in particular, it is just a blanket statement). Regardless, that is way off the topic of my original post.
Quote:
|
i find it curious that you directed your premise toward people who oppose bush, as if opposition to bush could be linked to some kind of group think,
|
Not a group think, but everybody
is saying the same thing. Sure, there are reasons to vote for Kerry, but it really isn't being heralded from the rooftops. The trumpets I hear all toot the same song.
Quote:
|
more like a rotation of factions within an oligarchy that uses the rhetoric of democracy to keep itself legitimate
|
Who would the "controlling few" be in your equation?
If you remove spending from the equation, I don't see your point. Both sides spend to almost a criminal level, but other than that, they really don't have commonalities.
If you watch politicians, how they vote, etc., it isn't very hard to tell which side of the fence they are on. Yes, it is a two-party system and it will probably stay that way for a long time. There are dozens of different parties in the U.S., but they don't have enough of a following to be effective on election day. Personally, I support the two-party system (which we have but then again we don't). If we only had two options on election day, we would be able to clearly see who had a simple majority. Now we just get to deal with a plurality, which just divides the base even further. Actually, let me rephrase. I support the two-party system but in no way would I mandate it.