Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - rethinking what it takes to be a representative of the people

mb99usa · 10-10-2003, 07:10 AM

I have to chime in here. I think the whole problem with who we have to choose from to lead us is because it comes down to only 2 real choices. You can either pick a life-long politician or a celebrity/wealthy individual. The problem stems from how much it costs to get elected. The life-long politician will have the backing and money from one of the major parties and the celebrity/wealthy individual will have their own money to front if they don't have the backing of a major party.

The election in California proved this. Out of the 135 people running Schwarzenegger had the most money and in his case party backing. Noone else had a chance against him regardless of their qualifications or experience.

The other issue is name recognition. California's recent election had several nationally known names but none larger than Schwarzenegger. When anyone walks in to a voting booth and looks at the choices, unless they are really looking to shake things up, will choose names they recognize. Everyone likes familiarity and choosing a recognizable name brings comfort.

Anyone can run for office but how many votes do you think you'll get on a shoe-string campaign budget with no party behind you?

10-10-2003, 07:10 AM	#5 (permalink)
mb99usa Keep on rolling. It only hurts for a little while. Location: wherever I am	I have to chime in here. I think the whole problem with who we have to choose from to lead us is because it comes down to only 2 real choices. You can either pick a life-long politician or a celebrity/wealthy individual. The problem stems from how much it costs to get elected. The life-long politician will have the backing and money from one of the major parties and the celebrity/wealthy individual will have their own money to front if they don't have the backing of a major party. The election in California proved this. Out of the 135 people running Schwarzenegger had the most money and in his case party backing. Noone else had a chance against him regardless of their qualifications or experience. The other issue is name recognition. California's recent election had several nationally known names but none larger than Schwarzenegger. When anyone walks in to a voting booth and looks at the choices, unless they are really looking to shake things up, will choose names they recognize. Everyone likes familiarity and choosing a recognizable name brings comfort. Anyone can run for office but how many votes do you think you'll get on a shoe-string campaign budget with no party behind you? __________________ So, what's your point? It's not an attitude, it's a way of life.