Somewhere in the news yesterday I heard that voters are beginning to like Sarah Palin less as they get to know more about her. I thought that was interesting since I heard basically the same thing said about Barack Obama back in June or July. My own experience is that I am liking both Obama and McCain less and less the more I hear or see from them. On the other hand, if I had the option to mix-and-match from the two tickets I would be most supportive of (read "least opposed to") a Biden-Palin ticket (not quote sure who I’d put at the top).
Perhaps Hillary Clinton was onto something since she had maxed out her negatives before she even started campaigning. I had long ago concluded that I was not voting for one of the major tickets this year, but this morning I decided that unless I am able to get behind one of the third party tickets (which I have not been able to do so far) I will be writing in "No Confidence" on November 4th.
I look at it like this:
Q – Which foot do I want to chew off, the right foot in the bear trap, the left foot crushed beneath the boulder, or both?
A – I don’t know, but it really sucks to have gotten into this situation in the first place, and no matter what I do, walking out of this mess isn’t going to be pretty.
It’s worse than that. When I reach out to catch the ropes being offered by the potential saviors on either side of the canyon I discover that their ropes are mere threads that can’t support me – even without the added resistance of the boulder or the bear trap.
Oh, I forgot to mention that it’s nighttime, the snow is 5 feet deep and falling fast, and the wolves are not that far away.
I meant that voting a democrat or a republican is like chewing one foot off, and voting is chewing both feet off.
Any way you cut it, we’re in for a rough time.
Many libertarians (not members of the Libertarian Party, but self-styled libertarians) will argue that it is a good thing for Americans to go sour on politics. The level of Americans’ faith in the institution of national politics is at a dismally low level. Maybe this can help provide the impetus for citizens to reduce their desires for the federal government to solve problems.
While the presidency is indeed an important piece of the political puzzle, Congress is perhaps even more important, and people trust Congress even less than they do the Chief Executive. But only when Congress is viewed collectively. Most voters still hold their representative and senators in much, much higher regard than they do Congress as a whole.
It reminds me of this demotivational poster about meetings: http://www.despair.com/meetings.html , which reads, “Because none of us is as dumb as all of us.” That seems to epitomize our current situation with Congress.
Actually, I think the quote for government that says, “If you think the problems we create are bad, just wait until you see our solutions.”
http://www.despair.com/government.html
I’ve heard the sentiment that people souring on politics is a good thing – there may be some truth to that, but I think you are right that Congress is probably even more important. unfortunately most of the libertarian minded people I know are, like most other people, still falling into the trap of elevating the presidency to a higher position of importance and not focusing on their Congressional officials. Perhaps it’s because it is easier to imagine getting one third-party candidate elected as president than it is to imagine 468 incumbents being tossed aside all over the country (435 representatives and 33 senators currently seeking re-election). Also, the fact that most people fail to see their own representatives as part of the problem is unfortunate but true. We can always hope that this year will be different since approval ratings for Congress have never been lower.
A large part of the reason that so many are dissatisfied with the leaders we get, is that we’re dissatisfied with the options we’re given to vote for. If we wait for election season to kick into full gear to decide who we want to represent us, we’ve already missed the majority of the process.
If we want good leaders to choose from – rather than the lousy options we’re “given” at election time, we need to be actively engaged in the political party of our choice, attending committee meetings and caucuses, and promoting good leaders from the grassroots.
Ignoring the lower levels of politics and complaining that we have lousy candidates to choose from isn’t much different from skipping elections and complaining about lousy elected officials.
Jason,
You are absolutely right. We need an electorate that participates through the whole process rather than merely on the last step. That requires a stable electorate. I am one to be involved, but I’ve had a year of almost constant change so that I don’t live in the same congressional district now as I lived in during the primary. I’m looking forward to being settled (for more than one election cycle) and really getting involved.
I do get involved at the grass roots level of politics and have done so for years. While this helps select leaders more to our liking, it is a myth that it will produce substantially better political leaders.
I know I have said this before, but it is a fact of organizational behavior that people in an organization tend to behave according to the norms in the organizational culture. People respond to the incentives within the system in which they operate.
Politicians, once elected, behave according to the incentives within the political system. The basic nature of political culture has not changed much throughout recorded history. Many of the incentives in any political organization are perverse.
Our Founders recognized this and tried to develop a system of checks and balances that pitted various political factions against each other in the hope of maintaining a proper balance.
If we want to be less affected by perverse incentives, the answer is to reduce the scope of matters that politicians control. Even grass roots involvement isn’t going to magically give us virtuous politicians that are great leaders. I contend that any political system is ill suited for that.
Like the standard statistical model of averages, only a handful of outliers will fall into the virtuous great leader category. The vast majority of politicians will not. Trying to make politics virtuous is like trying to take the dirt out of soil.
This is why I want smaller government. The less stuff politicians can get their hands on, the less dirt they can spread around.
Well said.