an election should be a bet on the future, not a popularity test of the past?
2007-12-13 01:39:54 · 9 answers · asked by Star doodle 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Senior Citizens
Whether you like it or not, "Past performance is still the best indicator of future performance". I will freely admit it isn't perfect but IMO it beats a "Wild @$$ed Guess".
I sometimes wish I was a Sheeple. Just find the capital "R" or "D" and let it go at that. The problem is, it doesn't feel right. At this point I feel like I have a handle on most of the front runners for both parties and I don't like any of them enough to offer them my cell phone if they were broke down along side the road.
At this point I have no idea where my vote will go. The only thing I am certain of is I will vote; even if it means writing in my brother's name. He would probably do a better job than a committee of the front runners.
2007-12-13 04:44:09 · answer #1 · answered by gimpalomg 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You can't believe everything you see and read in the media. It's interesting that Oprah's endorsement of Obama has moved him to front runner in the Democrats. Her popularity certainly gave him a boost. Maybe Ellen Degeneres or Jay Leno will start campaigning for Hillary Clinton now? It's going to get interesting.
2007-12-13 09:53:05 · answer #2 · answered by Miz D 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely. I have a tendency to not vote for the mud slinger. I vote on the merits of the candidate. Don't tell me how much dope your opponent smoked in college, tell me what you stand for. So far I like Bill Richardson. He has some pretty good points and plans for Iraq, health care, energy, and Social Security.
2007-12-13 12:51:14 · answer #3 · answered by curious connie 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I do want to know a candidate's past history - AS it relates to the office for which he/she is running. Could care less about some personal junk
2007-12-13 09:45:17 · answer #4 · answered by sage seeker 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Unfortunately, I find it hard to believe what any politician says anymore. I do think their past actions in whatever offices they held should be considered when evaluating them for any future office.
2007-12-13 09:53:24 · answer #5 · answered by Lady G 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
the first part of the question is no I do not believe what I hear. the second part is it should be about the future not the past.
2007-12-13 09:49:04 · answer #6 · answered by Aloha_Ann 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's 6 of one and a half dozen of the other!!! Basically, it's all talk!!! Nobody ever follows through!!!
2007-12-13 09:46:23 · answer #7 · answered by ndnquah 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
"Muckraking" is nothing new. Neither is "checkbook journalism". Stuffing ballot boxes , losing ballot boxes, it's been going on for centuries.
2007-12-13 13:39:07 · answer #8 · answered by catspit 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"bet"? -- exactly what is, a hulluva gamble.
2007-12-13 15:55:26 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋