All the presedential election is, is a contest over who can raise more money to get there name out there more than anyone else? very seldom does the candidate that is best suited for the presidency win the election
2007-04-03 07:38:36 · 9 answers · asked by redraideralex 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
It's beyond ridiculous and is only compounded by the fact that people today treat politics and elections like it's the Super Bowl and the only thing that matters in the end is that your team won. People support blue or red, a donkey or an elephant, but not anything that would require time to research and understand---like god forbid---the livlihood of our nation financially, militarily and socially.
What's even worse is that we reserve podiums for people who haven't a clue about the inner workings of politics or their own government, and we give them a free pass when they spew garbage like they're in-the-know or something. Just because you've made your way into television, movies or the music industry doesn't mean that it comes with a degree in political science.
2007-04-03 07:45:52 · answer #1 · answered by jdm 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I find it funny to watch grown people act like kids fighting over a sucker . Blaming one another and not willing to take a stand on true issues . It is hard to get a straight answer from any of them and I truly wonder if they have any personnel view they hold for themselves . I believe they are puppets on strings on who ever holds the purse for a campaign and tend to try and please the bankers backing them . So it would be hard to have your own view when you tend to please people! And far as the one with the most money wins . That is tough to say . I would hope people would make a better decision that just voting for someone just because you see there face everyday
2007-04-03 14:49:34 · answer #2 · answered by jay_rock74 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually, it's not even that. It's a popularity contest. Every election is. It's not about right or wrong, or best decisions, it's about who is more popular. Also, voter fraud and massive elections campaigns (funded by $) can contribute to a win.
2007-04-03 14:46:53 · answer #3 · answered by Pfo 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only solution is publicly funded elections, something neither party wants to have; it forces the underhanded practices (which both parties engage in) out of the election process.
2007-04-03 14:47:55 · answer #4 · answered by truthspeaker10 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree. Unfortunately, though, people often go for style over substance, so they normally vote for those who can afford the best PR campaigns.
2007-04-03 14:43:11 · answer #5 · answered by tangerine 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes, it's ridiculous, but so is a lot more in this world. Let's just love.
2007-04-03 14:44:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Which is probably why Hillary(ous) opted out of the government program, so she could "pursuade" her "friends" to pour the money in - kind of like Evita Peron. I am beginning to get the notion she is using Evita as her patron saint!!!
2007-04-03 14:43:14 · answer #7 · answered by galfromcal 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Yeah, it would have been nice if Bush Sr. or even Dole had defeated Bill Clinton, but he's such a smooth talker.
2007-04-03 14:44:32 · answer #8 · answered by mikehunt29 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Yes, it is ridiculous, it should be different.
2007-04-03 14:43:03 · answer #9 · answered by one voice 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋