They don't respect the intelligence of their audience? They don't think their audience has the requisite smarts to deal with complex issues that involve multi-faceted perspectives.
2007-09-07 03:10:45 · 21 answers · asked by El Duderino 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Look at the dumb azz questions on here about Edward's hair and Hillary's ankles and you will see that they are probably right.
2007-09-07 03:15:17 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
For the most part the audience doesn't. People have always been sheep for the most part. And this works on both sides of the aisle. Look at how many people on the left say Bush is an idiot, or a moron, and look how many people believe them. Is Bush going to rival Stephen Hawking for IQ points? No, but Bush isn't stupid either. He isn't the most eloquent speaker, but that doesn't make him a dullard. But those on the left like to say he is. You don't become president being an idiot. You don't have to be a genius, but you don't accidently stumble upon the presidency, stay in office for 4 years then win again. And if that is the case it doesn't say much for Gore or Kerry.
The non-politicians on both sides of the aisle will spew whatever personal insults they can at the other side. I heard Rachel Mado (lefty on Air America) call Fred Thompson a cradle robber because his wife is so young. What doesn't that have to do with being president? I'll tell you, the same thing as John Edwards haircuts or Hillary's ankles, nothing. You just hear about Hannity, O'Reilly and Coulter more because of their popularity. Listen to Keith Olbermann for a night and see what he says about the right.
2007-09-07 10:21:25 · answer #2 · answered by Angelus2007 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Do you think someone who uses the handle El Duderino indicates his intelligence?
Not that I care a rip about Clintons haircut or Edwards ankles (BG), it could be that's all they have to talk about when it comes to Edwards and Clinton. I know from what I've heard Clinton and Edwards say, they haven't really said much. Oh they have talked a lot. They just haven't said anything that peaked my interest. Just standard Democrat pre convention retoric. It's like watching reruns of Green Acres. It wasn't very good the first time and hasn't gotten any better with age.
2007-09-07 12:57:34 · answer #3 · answered by namsaev 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think it's because the focus groups indicate that "haircuts" helps generate a negative view of Edwards.
I haven't seen much in the way of positive comments for any of the Republicans. I think the Republicans and internet neo-cons know they're only chance to win is to poison the well early and often.
Which is a fancy way to say they don't respect our intelligence, I guess.
2007-09-07 18:01:10 · answer #4 · answered by Mr. Bad Day 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is terribly junior high. I hope its that they don't respect the intelligence of their audience, because if I though for one moment they were serious about such junk I'd lose hope for the nation who would follow them.
It is easier to talk about sex and ankles than ANWR and its effect on the environment and oil prices. Or the lack of legislation to control the outright greed of the banking companys that have us in the present mortgage mess.
I'm not even going to discuss the multiple failures of the ability of the Bush Admin to handle the war, or the Katrina aftermath or the 9/11 aftermath for that matter. Lord help any of us if we have a serious attack in Chicago or Pasadena or Podunk. They aren't ready, they have no plans. This is so much more boring than Hillarys ankles, you kind of have to turn your brain on.
2007-09-07 10:20:48 · answer #5 · answered by justa 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
There is very little actual real political debate in the United States; people focus on trivia like this, goaded on by the media. It's the reason that a frat boy like Dubya got elected; people voted for him largely on the basis of "I'd rather have a beer with him than Al Gore." Sometimes I think you should have to pass an IQ test and a test of your knowledge of the issues before you can be allowed to vote. The problem exists in Canada, where I live, also, but to a lesser degree, I like to think.
2007-09-07 10:16:43 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 2⤋
The blowhards on the right really enjoy mocking and belittling anyone who has the gall to disagree with them. As for those $400 haircuts, I would love to compare the salaries of the makeup artists employed by the White House to that and see how much we pay to have dubya's hair cut.
2007-09-07 10:25:10 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Nope. I think they focus on those things JOKINGLY because their audience has LONG AGO rejected the politics of the Left.
Why would any thinking person beat a dead horse?!
2007-09-07 10:27:07 · answer #8 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Superficialities and non-issues have always been a safe substitute for rational thinking on these shows. The volume of people who buy into it really mkaes me wonder if the world is right in thinking Americans are really that stupid.
2007-09-07 10:16:04 · answer #9 · answered by douglas l 5 · 7⤊ 2⤋
Yes.
Also, the rightwing tactic perfected by Karl Rove is to attack the messenger. They can't win on the facts, so they have to win by lying, smearing, and cheating.
2007-09-07 10:20:25 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋