![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
blairprovenceWrestled the TV away from my sister who was watching the FOX News special on Sarah Palin. Wanted to watch the House marathon on USA - despite the fact that I own all the DVDs. Yeah, I make no sense.
Meanwhile, the only political post I will make this season....
The Democratic political bent of fandom is pretty obvious, judging from the posts about it on my flist. I suppose maybe my corner of fandom doesn't exactly represent the country as a whole, as the US seems to be hovering at 50-50.
I tend to view elections from the perspective of someone who has studied modern history extensively, so I think what's striking me most about the rhetoric is the vitriol of it. Not the vilification of the opponents by the proponents - that has a solid historical basis. Mudslinging is a cherished American institution. But I'm really surprised by all the doomsayers who write serious posts about how "the country has no future if X candidate wins" and they're thinking seriously about moving to Canada or advocate seceding from the Union.
Really?
I have a lot of issues with the American political process. I would love to get rid of pork barrel spending supported by amendments to legislation that have nothing to do with the purpose of the legislation. I like the idea of more than two political parties that would give more weight to moderates and compromise and working together and less weight to the posturings of the extreme left and right. But I do believe in the checks and balances of the executive, legislative and judicial branches, and I do believe in the inevitability of change.
I am not a member of a gay or lesbian minority, so the urgency of legislation allowing them to marry is not something I feel personally. But I think that the evolution of society will bring about those rights, no matter who is in office. (Not that either candidate is advocating such). After all, marriages in Massachusetts and California came about during Bush's presidency. Most young people I talk to don't even see it as an argument.
I think that we will eventually withdraw from Iraq and be more cautious about further military adventuring, no matter who is President, because the lessons of history are once again (temporarily) fresh.
I think that the office of President has very little impact on the ebb and flow of the economy.
It's funny that no matter how often it is demonstrated that Presidential platforms have no chance to become policy without changes and compromises and long drawn-out votes, people will declare that the sky will immediately fall and the country will go in the crapper moments after X is elected.
If Obama wins, there will not automatically be sunshine, puppies, and heavenly choirs bursting into song. The people of the world will not all drink Coke and hold hands and love the USA. If McCain wins, we will not therefore descend into an Orwellian nightmare society.
People who disagree with your positions are not necessarily a) completely stupid, b) totally evil, or c) terribly deluded. Sometimes, they just have their own opinions.
And that's a good thing.
Meanwhile, the only political post I will make this season....
The Democratic political bent of fandom is pretty obvious, judging from the posts about it on my flist. I suppose maybe my corner of fandom doesn't exactly represent the country as a whole, as the US seems to be hovering at 50-50.
I tend to view elections from the perspective of someone who has studied modern history extensively, so I think what's striking me most about the rhetoric is the vitriol of it. Not the vilification of the opponents by the proponents - that has a solid historical basis. Mudslinging is a cherished American institution. But I'm really surprised by all the doomsayers who write serious posts about how "the country has no future if X candidate wins" and they're thinking seriously about moving to Canada or advocate seceding from the Union.
Really?
I have a lot of issues with the American political process. I would love to get rid of pork barrel spending supported by amendments to legislation that have nothing to do with the purpose of the legislation. I like the idea of more than two political parties that would give more weight to moderates and compromise and working together and less weight to the posturings of the extreme left and right. But I do believe in the checks and balances of the executive, legislative and judicial branches, and I do believe in the inevitability of change.
I am not a member of a gay or lesbian minority, so the urgency of legislation allowing them to marry is not something I feel personally. But I think that the evolution of society will bring about those rights, no matter who is in office. (Not that either candidate is advocating such). After all, marriages in Massachusetts and California came about during Bush's presidency. Most young people I talk to don't even see it as an argument.
I think that we will eventually withdraw from Iraq and be more cautious about further military adventuring, no matter who is President, because the lessons of history are once again (temporarily) fresh.
I think that the office of President has very little impact on the ebb and flow of the economy.
It's funny that no matter how often it is demonstrated that Presidential platforms have no chance to become policy without changes and compromises and long drawn-out votes, people will declare that the sky will immediately fall and the country will go in the crapper moments after X is elected.
If Obama wins, there will not automatically be sunshine, puppies, and heavenly choirs bursting into song. The people of the world will not all drink Coke and hold hands and love the USA. If McCain wins, we will not therefore descend into an Orwellian nightmare society.
People who disagree with your positions are not necessarily a) completely stupid, b) totally evil, or c) terribly deluded. Sometimes, they just have their own opinions.
And that's a good thing.
