English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

It seems to me that for most people - HOW THE MESSAGE IS PRESENTED seems to matter more.

Should we then just elect actors as our top politicians and just feed them their lines on Q cards based on what party is elected at the time?

2007-04-07 06:28:51 · 30 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

30 answers

Again, I agree with you, but will add this little twist to ponder on.

My grandfather who has long passed away, had a saying, "It is not what he said that made me angry, it is the way he looked when he said it!"

2007-04-07 12:25:19 · answer #1 · answered by clwkcmo 5 · 1 0

The message a politician is presenting is most important. Unfortunately we also need entertainment. If the politician is not presenting the message in a way that will "entertain" the listener. Then he/she will lose the attention of his/her audience. Just like when your in a lecture hall..if the lecturer is boring (even if he/she has a good message) than half the time your mind starts wandering or sadly you fall asleep.



As always, actions speak louder than words
They can talk the talk but can they walk the walk?

2007-04-08 05:28:59 · answer #2 · answered by sabbycat76 4 · 1 0

I think the problem is that many think politicians ARE acting.
That's why it is important what they're voting record is, what do they wish to get accomplished, what can they realistically get accomplished. Why does this person want to be president? Can they take the heat and still remain connected to the people and the needs of the country instead of special interest groups who had a big hand in getting them elected? I could go on and on.

There are as many factors involved in choosing who to vote for as there are people who vote. Any voter will say It boils down to "Will you really represent me?"

2007-04-07 07:24:20 · answer #3 · answered by BekindtoAnimals22 7 · 0 0

Neither. I don't care about what a politician says. What he/she DOES is much more important. Too many Americans base their opinions on sound bytes and rhetoric. Candidates know this and happily pay lip service to what "the people" want, knowing that after they are elected, their "promises" will be broken and no one will call them on it...

“A politician is a man who would cut down a redwood tree, then mount the stump and make a speech for conservation.” - Adlai E. Stevenson

2007-04-07 10:00:56 · answer #4 · answered by john_stolworthy 6 · 2 0

The message is more important, but presentation is also important. It's called people skills. I'm not sure why you feel that most people consider the presentation to be more important- hell, I'm not sure that YOU'RE sure you know why you feel that way either. As for electing actors... not sure why you're wording that hypothetically. Reagan, Schwarzenegger... and all politicians, regardless of whether they're liberal, conservative, or centrist, use things like teleprompters...

2007-04-07 06:33:26 · answer #5 · answered by David 7 · 1 0

Actually what matters more is not the message or the presentation of said message, but the follow through. Most of our politicians are puppets fed their lines with cue cards. The prevailing political winds sway them regardless of what their constituents want.

2007-04-07 06:37:00 · answer #6 · answered by shojo 6 · 1 0

That depends on how interested the party is in the subject. If someone is interested and cares about a subject, the message is the most important. If the person doesn't really understand a subject or doesn't really care, how it is presented is more important. It's a common phenomenon used in both politics and sales

2007-04-07 06:37:37 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

You have less faith in the American people than I do.

Our younger generations are getting smarter about information. They know what it is, who makes it, and why.

Starting in 2008, I predict core issues will be the main focus of all voters.

America can't afford to waste any more time. We need to elect the best. Or there will be a lot more blood spilled in the deserts of the Middle East.

2007-04-07 06:34:08 · answer #8 · answered by Truth 5 · 0 0

I like politicians who walk the walk and not talk the talk. I'm not sure what distinction you are trying to make. Remember way back when, when Bush said he was going to build bi-partisan relationships if elected. He had a great message, presented it well and then failed to execute it. It's all rhetoric anyway

2007-04-07 06:32:52 · answer #9 · answered by Jackie Oh! 7 · 0 0

precis for TLDR human beings i want clever human beings to return to united statesa.. 60% of human beings are conservative. i'm too cool to lower back that up with a source so those are actually not THE DROIDS you're searching for. McCain lost 'reason at the back of politics Illegals suck. i'm no longer a racist. in case you may only examine the invoice you may at once accept as true with me. everybody that disagrees with me needless to say did no longer examine it. Congrats! You get a blue ribbon! Wait, oh my undesirable, have been given my metaphors mixed up. You get a yellow famous guy or woman. do no longer hate the playa, hate the sport. perhaps i'm good and you're incorrect.

2016-12-20 08:23:44 · answer #10 · answered by clapperton 3 · 0 0

I like your question
I can not and do not believe a single word that is uttered by a politicians, until what she/he said is manifested. The are the whores of the world, say anything to get elected and I can't blame them because if they would utter the truth, they would not get elected.

2007-04-07 06:41:38 · answer #11 · answered by man of ape 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers