This presidential primaries is interesting to me and symbolically significant.
On the Democratic side, on one hand, there is Clinton, a woman, and on the other hand, Obama, who is multi-racial.
For me, the win of either of them would be great, on a symbolic level.
But, no, really, let’s get on with it. The presidential election is not only about symbolic meaning, it’s about reality.
I don’t want to choose based on symbolic meaning and hope that those who are voting don’t.
I didn’t have a strong opinion other than I kind of like what Hillary Rodham Clinton has done and her depth of experience. And then, when I saw the Democratic debate between her and Barak Obama held at UT Austin, I was kind of shocked that he was even being considered that seriously.
Inspirational speeches are not written by him: Obama gives the speech writers the ideas and he essentially reads what they have prepared for him. A charismatic orator is what he seems to be. I mean, if a president’s job is only to stamp and okay things, work with a team of officials, and to give prepared speeches, sure, I’m sure he could do fine. But, a president does so much more than that: They not only have to make pleasant conversation with heads of other countries and smartly fold in deals within that. They have to be able to negotiate with others without a script. They got to know a lot about a lot of different issues and have the ideas at the tip of your tongue. He clearly did not have those skills. He was such your charismatic young guy. Let me say this again, I was shocked that he is being considered so seriously for a presidential candidacy.
I was really shocked when George W. Bush was elected also. I thought, “well, the psychology must be that they want someone who they feel like could be their next-door neighbor.” But hey, if the country could be run by “your next-door neighbor,” being a president is really no big deal. Do people really want to believe that? The person who becomes president has to be incredibly smart and has had to have been to a good school with a good education–they will be a member of the elite. Of course! What’s the point of deluding yourself about that?
The amount of money that is being spent on the campaigns is absurd. Especially the fact that it’s being used on TV ads. The fact that people vote based on that is even more deplorable.
And, the New York Times makes me nauseated. They are running the strongest campaign for Obama. Almost all the articles are written to give people the impression that Obama is strong and he is destined to be the winner. Many of the articles start with lines that show that Obama is going strong. They bury the other perspective in the middle of the article and then at the end give some quote that knocks out Clinton’s perspective or position.
Every newspaper photo of Obama in the NYT sets him in the middle and in focus, which also creates the sense that “he is the man.” For Clinton, she is often relegated to the margin of the frame. Her face is small and often it is only her silhouette that you see.
I wonder if people are really not noticing what the New York Times is doing to the race?
Let me be an extremist for a second and say:
The media should be banned from participating in the race like this.
Also, candidates should not be allowed to run TV ads like this. What a waste of voter money. People should vote based on what they read on paper (or on the net) about each candidate’s position on different issues. Or watch a debate, or go listen to the candidate speak when s/he comes to campaign. Choosing a new president should not be treated like purchasing a new bike. It’s that involved of a process. It should be treated that way.