We elect officials once every four years, and when we do it, we assume that they will do their job. So why instead of figuring out a way to deal with iraq, immigration, the economy, or the environment, are they so busy worrying about campaigning for 2008. Its pretty obvious that the republicans are going to either have to run with Jesus or Martin Luther King Jr. to have any chance....so why don't the democrats just pick a candidate now, announce their support, and then get their asses back to work.
If they hired me, and then two of the next four years pimpin my resume out to everyone, they'd have issues....yet Americans seem to think its ok when their elected officials do it.
J_
2007-05-23 05:10:09 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Americans don't think it is okay. I think that a majority of voters would love for the campaigning to start in January of 2008 for a November 2008 election.
But they do this for numerous reasons. One is for primaries - to actually get the nomination of the party. Another reason is that people more than not vote for a name, and not necessarily the issues. The voters that are "casual" to politics tend to look at the names and vote for the familiar one (well if I have heard of them, they must be good. . .). It is sad, but unfortunately a reason that we are swarmed with campaigning.
Personally, I think that it should be "pay per view", and that way we can order a "program" that would background all of the candidates, show their voting records, and discuss their platforms. Straight forward with no mud slinging. And the ones interested in watching it could, but the ones not interested in seeing it wouldn't have to. The money paid for viewing would go towards a fund within the community it is viewed in, and it would be used for whatever the community sees it is needed for.
I am sure this isn't a perfect idea, but I am willing to take this over being slammed with the mud slinging, posing, and faces until November 2008. I don't know if I can take any more of this. . .
2007-05-23 05:43:14 · answer #1 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I know it *seems* that way to people because this is the first time in a LONG time that people have actually taken a genuine interest in the election.
But I assure you... politicians in both parties have ALWAYS been in a perpetual state of campaigning... and you're right... it's very sad indeed.
We are just waking up as a society and paying attention to this now.
I have to add that Republicans did it last time... they were campaigning through the mega churches for George Bush at least 3 years before the elections... and they continue that campaign today...
The Democrats are just using THEIR best friends now... the mainstream media.
Which method of thought control do you prefer?
2007-05-23 07:00:10 · answer #2 · answered by rabble rouser 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because if they're worrying about ending the war and not campaigning, then they cannot become president in the first place and can't end it anyway. Also 2008 is next year, and some people take quite a while to convince, so it only makes since that they campaigne this early.
2007-05-23 05:14:16 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is how it's been for the last 20 years.
2007-05-23 05:17:23 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i do no longer comprehend the way McCain is in charge for the destructive financial equipment, make that destructive international financial equipment. I take it you're balloting for the terrorist Obama. If that's failing why does it seem to have each and every democrat squirming? no count number the way you spin it, Obama's chum killed human beings for political purposes. that's a terrorist, and your nominee's BFF. LOL
2016-11-26 19:46:39 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No it should start 8 years before hand so the people can really watch the candidates and get a true feel for their platforms.
2007-05-23 05:56:30 · answer #6 · answered by JOHN D 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Like Walmart putting out Christmas in July!
2007-05-23 05:12:19 · answer #7 · answered by Sheila 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes and that's why I am all for term limits. As soon as they get elected they start going about getting re-elected and forget why they are supposed to be in Washington . No wonder nothing gets accomplished there.
2007-05-23 05:15:34 · answer #8 · answered by booman17 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It shows how tired the US is with the Bush presidency.
A lot of Americans are having buyers remorse over voting for him a second time.
Not that Kerry was much of an alternative......
2007-05-23 05:15:37 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
By the time November 2008 rolls around, I'll be so sick of all this, I won't even be turning the TV on.
2007-05-23 05:15:28 · answer #10 · answered by kiwi 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋