My dilemma
|
|
Joy Honey
Not just another dumass
Join date: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 3,751
|
01-07-2006 09:27
I posted this in one of those too many Bush signs threads that got combined. I really do want some input on this... Why can't there be more informed voters out there? I am sooo embarrassed about this, but what do you say to your mother when she qualifies voting for Bush in these ways: Election 2000: She got exit polled. She told them she voted for Bush because "Al Gore is an idiot." Well informed voter? Election 2004: No exit poll bragged about. Her older sister "told her how to vote" and "she's just not being told how to vote" and this special gem "John Kerry did not serve in Vietnam as long as my brother."  I can't bitch-slap her for it, because she's my mother and violence never solved anything. Education is probably out of the question, because she "is set in her ways." The only person she really listens to about politics is my brother (Fox News addict). How do I ensure she never votes again??? 
_____________________
Reality continues to ruin my life. - Calvin
You have delighted us long enough. - Jane Austen
Sometimes I need what only you can provide: your absence. - Ashleigh Brilliant
|
|
Margaret Mfume
I.C.
Join date: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 2,492
|
01-07-2006 09:32
From: Joy Honey I posted this in one of those too many Bush signs threads that got combined. I really do want some input on this... Why can't there be more informed voters out there? I am sooo embarrassed about this, but what do you say to your mother when she qualifies voting for Bush in these ways: Election 2000: She got exit polled. She told them she voted for Bush because "Al Gore is an idiot." Well informed voter? Election 2004: No exit poll bragged about. Her older sister "told her how to vote" and "she's just not being told how to vote" and this special gem "John Kerry did not serve in Vietnam as long as my brother." I can't bitch-slap her for it, because she's my mother and violence never solved anything. Education is probably out of the question, because she "is set in her ways." The only person she really listens to about politics is my brother (Fox News addict). How do I ensure she never votes again??? Apparently she listens to her older sister, too, in addition to your brother. Why do they seem to have her ear but not you? Maybe the desire to smack her and suppress her right to vote for disagreeing with you is not so hidden and is a bit off putting.
_____________________
hush 
|
|
Joy Honey
Not just another dumass
Join date: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 3,751
|
01-07-2006 09:42
From: Margaret Mfume Apparently she listens to her older sister, too, in addition to your brother. Why do they seem to have her ear but not you? Maybe the desire to smack her and suppress her right to vote for disagreeing with you is not so hidden and is a bit off putting. Oh, she doesn't listen to her sister either. Her sister told her she'd be foolish to vote for Bush... Sorry for the confusion there. I just really want to make sure she makes more informed choices. **EDIT** I really don't care for whom she casts her votes. As long as she knows why she voted FOR someone...
_____________________
Reality continues to ruin my life. - Calvin
You have delighted us long enough. - Jane Austen
Sometimes I need what only you can provide: your absence. - Ashleigh Brilliant
|
|
Reitsuki Kojima
Witchhunter
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,328
|
01-07-2006 09:59
There are times when voting for someone because the other canidate isn't acceptable is the only choice.
That was the primary reason I voted for Bush last time... I wasn't entierly happy with his first time performance, but I sure as heck didn't want the alternative.
See also the "Anyone But Bush" type people in the same election.
It's not the best reason to vote, but it is a reason.
As for the rest... *shrug*
_____________________
I am myself indifferent honest; but yet I could accuse me of such things that it were better my mother had not borne me: I am very proud, revengeful, ambitious, with more offenses at my beck than I have thoughts to put them in, imagination to give them shape, or time to act them in. What should such fellows as I do crawling between earth and heaven? We are arrant knaves, all; believe none of us.
|
|
Margaret Mfume
I.C.
Join date: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 2,492
|
01-07-2006 10:04
From: Joy Honey I really don't care for whom she casts her votes. As long as she knows why she voted FOR someone... Exactly. My volunteer efforts were in the Right to Vote Camp. At the district I was working at, I encountered quite a few people who were wanting me to help them vote. Not just cast their ballot but to tell them which way to vote. The verbage on the proposals was indeed confusing, but I maintained support of their ability to make their own decision. My method was to take a walk outside of the precinct with them. I would provide what both sides had to say for and against it. I continued to state my belief in their ablity to make their own choice. I don't know, they just seemed more satisfied with their decision than I see most people after they've participated in such discussions. Encouraging your mom's ability to think and reason will go a lot further towards a chipping away at lifetime of not believing in herself. Be glad you were raised such that you have the self confidence to know and speak your own mind.
_____________________
hush
|
|
Introvert Petunia
over 2 billion posts
Join date: 11 Sep 2004
Posts: 2,065
|
overlong reply
01-07-2006 11:14
Neil Postman wrote a book called Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business which has had a profound effect upon how I look at the political process. One bit that sticks in my mind is the historic Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858 for a seat on the Senate. These debates were held in the summer, in seven cities, to packed, sweltering audiences; some lasted for days. They consisted of days of extemporary, extended debate of subjects of concern of the day. The audience, largely composed of "common" agrarian citizens, sat through days of reasoned debate because it was important to them. These debates have since been held as an exemplar of excellent debate. Contrast this with the pre-prepared, time limited, "talking point" non-debates of our age combined with the news propensity for "sound bite" reportage where any concept longer than a sentence is thought to be a little too weighty. The Foreward to Postman's book is so insightful that I'm putting it here: We were keeping our eye on 1984. When the year came and the prophecy didn't, thoughtful Americans sang softly in praise of themselves. The roots of liberal democracy had held. Wherever else the terror had happened, we, at least, had not been visited by Orwellian nightmares.
But we had forgotten that alongside Orwell's dark vision, there was another - slightly older, slightly less well known, equally chilling: Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. Contrary to common belief even among the educated, Huxley and Orwell did not prophesy the same thing. Orwell warns that we will be overcome by an externally imposed oppression. But in Huxley's vision, no Big Brother is required to deprive people of their autonomy, maturity and history. As he saw it, people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.
What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions". In 1984, Huxley added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we love will ruin us.
This book is about the possibility that Huxley, not Orwell, was right. I am no longer surprised that we elect those who are electable rather than those who might best be suited to hold the positions. |
|
Zapoteth Zaius
Is back
Join date: 14 Feb 2004
Posts: 5,634
|
01-07-2006 11:18
Violence solves a lot..
_____________________
I have the right to remain silent. Anything I say will be misquoted and used against me.--------------- Zapoteth Designs, Temotu (100,50)--------------- 
|
|
Joy Honey
Not just another dumass
Join date: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 3,751
|
01-07-2006 11:45
Thanks for the replies  You've given me much to think on. It is too bad so many of us have become so accustomed to relying on sound bites to form full opinions about any issue, instead of doing any independent research. Oh well, one person at a time, right? And, Zap, violence doesn't solve anything - it only makes the aggressor feel better if he wins 
_____________________
Reality continues to ruin my life. - Calvin
You have delighted us long enough. - Jane Austen
Sometimes I need what only you can provide: your absence. - Ashleigh Brilliant
|
|
Zapoteth Zaius
Is back
Join date: 14 Feb 2004
Posts: 5,634
|
01-07-2006 11:49
BUT if you get in quick and hard enough with the violence they don't have a chance to win..
_____________________
I have the right to remain silent. Anything I say will be misquoted and used against me.--------------- Zapoteth Designs, Temotu (100,50)---------------
|
|
Joy Honey
Not just another dumass
Join date: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 3,751
|
01-07-2006 11:50
From: Zapoteth Zaius BUT if you get in quick and hard enough with the violence they don't have a chance to win.. Oh, you mean sucker-punching?
_____________________
Reality continues to ruin my life. - Calvin
You have delighted us long enough. - Jane Austen
Sometimes I need what only you can provide: your absence. - Ashleigh Brilliant
|
|
Zapoteth Zaius
Is back
Join date: 14 Feb 2004
Posts: 5,634
|
01-07-2006 11:52
From: Joy Honey Oh, you mean sucker-punching? Yeah.. Plus, aversion therapy..
_____________________
I have the right to remain silent. Anything I say will be misquoted and used against me.--------------- Zapoteth Designs, Temotu (100,50)---------------
|
|
Joy Honey
Not just another dumass
Join date: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 3,751
|
01-07-2006 11:53
_____________________
Reality continues to ruin my life. - Calvin
You have delighted us long enough. - Jane Austen
Sometimes I need what only you can provide: your absence. - Ashleigh Brilliant
|
|
Reitsuki Kojima
Witchhunter
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,328
|
01-07-2006 11:56
Part of the problem is that the political waters are ungodly murky across the spectrum. 10 "informed" people can have completely different views on the same issue because the political "game" is obfuscation. Even a relatively simple thing becomes complex when it becomes political.
I'm proibably going to offend some people with this, but the only real difference between what most people I've met consider "informed" and "educated by sound bites" is that the "informed" people have wasted more time, so far as I can tell. That and they tend to have an unreasonable sense of superiority over the sound-bitians. Most sources out there are just as confused as the individual, because as a general rule they are simply an individual. And then it gets even worse, because not only does the source add it's own confusion to an already confusing issue, the source almost invariably has its own agenda - I state this as a bipartisan fact, both sides of the isle (and all the parties too) do this simply as a mater of pure reflex - It's not even always intentional.
You can try to bypass the third-party sources and go to the second-party stuff, like court records, and judicial rulings, and such... But they aren't much less unbiased, and generally are even more confusing to the 'average' person, plus it takes a vast amount more time to dig up those sources, and to digest them.
And first-party sources just don't exist reliably... I consider Bush relatively honest by political standards (No comments please, we all have our own political views), but I still wouldn't take anything he says as the unvarnished truth. Even an honest politician only tells 75% of the truth.
_____________________
I am myself indifferent honest; but yet I could accuse me of such things that it were better my mother had not borne me: I am very proud, revengeful, ambitious, with more offenses at my beck than I have thoughts to put them in, imagination to give them shape, or time to act them in. What should such fellows as I do crawling between earth and heaven? We are arrant knaves, all; believe none of us.
|
|
Joy Honey
Not just another dumass
Join date: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 3,751
|
01-07-2006 12:03
From: Reitsuki Kojima Part of the problem is that the political waters are ungodly murky across the spectrum. 10 "informed" people can have completely different views on the same issue because the political "game" is obfuscation. Even a relatively simple thing becomes complex when it becomes political.
I'm proibably going to offend some people with this, but the only real difference between what most people I've met consider "informed" and "educated by sound bites" is that the "informed" people have wasted more time, so far as I can tell. That and they tend to have an unreasonable sense of superiority over the sound-bitians. Most sources out there are just as confused as the individual, because as a general rule they are simply an individual. And then it gets even worse, because not only does the source add it's own confusion to an already confusing issue, the source almost invariably has its own agenda - I state this as a bipartisan fact, both sides of the isle (and all the parties too) do this simply as a mater of pure reflex - It's not even always intentional.
You can try to bypass the third-party sources and go to the second-party stuff, like court records, and judicial rulings, and such... But they aren't much less unbiased, and generally are even more confusing to the 'average' person, plus it takes a vast amount more time to dig up those sources, and to digest them.
And first-party sources just don't exist reliably... I consider Bush relatively honest by political standards (No comments please, we all have our own political views), but I still wouldn't take anything he says as the unvarnished truth. Even an honest politician only tells 75% of the truth. I guess I'm mostly upset by this issue because most of the time it's for reasons such as those outlined above - particularly the "John Kerry wasn't in Vietnam as long as my brother remark. George Bush did not go to Vietnam at all. He served in the National Guard. This is fact. I am not trying to get into a fight about anyone's service records, so please let's not try to put one in here
_____________________
Reality continues to ruin my life. - Calvin
You have delighted us long enough. - Jane Austen
Sometimes I need what only you can provide: your absence. - Ashleigh Brilliant
|
|
Cocoanut Koala
Coco's Cottages
Join date: 7 Feb 2005
Posts: 7,903
|
01-07-2006 12:03
From: Joy Honey I posted this in one of those too many Bush signs threads that got combined. I really do want some input on this... Why can't there be more informed voters out there? I am sooo embarrassed about this, but what do you say to your mother when she qualifies voting for Bush in these ways: Election 2000: She got exit polled. She told them she voted for Bush because "Al Gore is an idiot." Well informed voter? Election 2004: No exit poll bragged about. Her older sister "told her how to vote" and "she's just not being told how to vote" and this special gem "John Kerry did not serve in Vietnam as long as my brother." I can't bitch-slap her for it, because she's my mother and violence never solved anything. Education is probably out of the question, because she "is set in her ways." The only person she really listens to about politics is my brother (Fox News addict). How do I ensure she never votes again??? I don't know. It is just so difficult to get those mothers to see the light. Obviously, she only thinks as she does because your brother has told her what to think. Or maybe her sister. Whatever it is, she obviously can't think well for herself, or come to any of her own conclusions regarding all that input, plus yours. Because certainly, if she were able to parse out all that input, she would realize that you are right. And being old, of course, she is too set in her ways to realize it is you she should listen to. It's unfortunate she is this ignorant and uneducable, and persists in voting for the wrong people. Of course you can't bitch-slap her for it, despite how tempting that is. These old people, especially mothers, it's hard to get any sense into their heads. And unfortunately, I can't think of any method you could use to make her stop voting. I know it's embarassing - mothers are that way. As are old people. And everyone who votes for Bush. Guess you just have to live with it. It's okay, though, cause there is a pay-off! When you get kids (assuming you don't have any yet), and they get to be teenagers, well, there is your prime time for embarassing THEM! It's so easy - like taking candy from a baby - and fun, too! Plus you get to be stubbornly the same person you always were before they even ever came along, and refuse to see the light! So don't despair, what goes around, comes around. coco |
|
Joy Honey
Not just another dumass
Join date: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 3,751
|
01-07-2006 12:09
From: Cocoanut Koala I don't know. It is just so difficult to get those mothers to see the light. Obviously, she only thinks as she does because your brother has told her what to think. Or maybe her sister. Whatever it is, she obviously can't think well for herself, or come to any of her own conclusions regarding all that input, plus yours.
Because certainly, if she were able to parse out all that input, she would realize that you are right. And being old, of course, she is too set in her ways to realize it is you she should listen to.
It's unfortunate she is this ignorant and uneducable, and persists in voting for the wrong people. Of course you can't bitch-slap her for it, despite how tempting that is. These old people, especially mothers, it's hard to get any sense into their heads. And unfortunately, I can't think of any method you could use to make her stop voting.
I know it's embarassing - mothers are that way. As are old people. And everyone who votes for Bush. Guess you just have to live with it.
It's okay, though, cause there is a pay-off! When you get kids (assuming you don't have any yet), and they get to be teenagers, well, there is your prime time for embarassing THEM! It's so easy - like taking candy from a baby - and fun, too!
Plus you get to be stubbornly the same person you always were before they even ever came along, and refuse to see the light! So don't despair, what goes around, comes around.
coco Nice of you to stroll in. As I have said before, I do not care who she votes for, the problem for me is her reasoning behind it. Yes it's a personal problem, I was looking for advice on how to get over it, mostly. **EDIT** If she were voting Democrat and used the same line of reasoning, I'd still think she needed to be more informed. BTW, I don't always vote Democrat. We're stuck with Bush for 3 more years, and I've come to terms with it. Thanks for being you coco.
_____________________
Reality continues to ruin my life. - Calvin
You have delighted us long enough. - Jane Austen
Sometimes I need what only you can provide: your absence. - Ashleigh Brilliant
|
|
Introvert Petunia
over 2 billion posts
Join date: 11 Sep 2004
Posts: 2,065
|
01-07-2006 12:42
From: Joy Honey I am sooo embarrassed about this, but what do you say to your mother when she qualifies voting for Bush in these ways:... I think the proper answer is "lovely weather we've been having lately". Very well put and to the point, Reitsuki. Obfuscation is the game. As far as honest politicians go, there was one for a time in my area who resigned after a couple of years of being everything one might hope of the ideal civil servant. His reason? "I can't stomach the politics any longer". Sigh. |
|
Cocoanut Koala
Coco's Cottages
Join date: 7 Feb 2005
Posts: 7,903
|
01-07-2006 14:28
From: Joy Honey Nice of you to stroll in. As I have said before, I do not care who she votes for, the problem for me is her reasoning behind it. Yes it's a personal problem, I was looking for advice on how to get over it, mostly. **EDIT** If she were voting Democrat and used the same line of reasoning, I'd still think she needed to be more informed. BTW, I don't always vote Democrat. We're stuck with Bush for 3 more years, and I've come to terms with it. Thanks for being you coco. Lol, sorry about that Joy. I couldn't help myself. It's the mom in me. On a more serious note, about being informed, she may well be a great deal more informed than you think. Lots of people can't and don't care to articulate well why they go for one thing rather than the other, but the overal gestalt of things, their gut feelings, their small articulated reasons, the needs that politician or party is speaking to, etc., all add up to why they make the decisions they do. They may not be that into politics, but they can still easily discern, from all the above, who they wish to vote for. I'm not too into politics, and my eyes glaze over if someone wants me to prove I'm informed, i.e., go very deep into political argument and actually be good at it. When people get to a point in discussing politics with me (I have a friend on the game who often does), and I'm not informed on that aspect, I just say "I don't know." But it doesn't keep me from knowing who I want to vote for, and often being quite certain in that knowledge. coco |
|
Chip Midnight
ate my baby!
Join date: 1 May 2003
Posts: 10,231
|
01-07-2006 14:34
I think there should be a prerequisite quiz people have to take before being allowed to vote in which they must prove a certain level of knowledge about current events, the main issues of the day, and the platforms of the major candidates. If you fail you can't vote. 
_____________________
 My other hobby: www.live365.com/stations/chip_midnight
|
|
Gabe Lippmann
"Phone's ringing, Dude."
Join date: 14 Jun 2004
Posts: 4,219
|
01-07-2006 14:50
From: Introvert Petunia I am no longer surprised that we elect those who are electable rather than those who might best be suited to hold the positions. Who else can be elected but someone who is electable?
_____________________
go to Nocturnal Threads 
|
|
Gabe Lippmann
"Phone's ringing, Dude."
Join date: 14 Jun 2004
Posts: 4,219
|
01-07-2006 14:51
From: Chip Midnight I think there should be a prerequisite quiz people have to take before being allowed to vote in which they must prove a certain level of knowledge about current events, the main issues of the day, and the platforms of the major candidates. If you fail you can't vote. I think only those that own significant amounts of land should be allowed to vote.
_____________________
go to Nocturnal Threads
|
|
Chance Abattoir
Future Rockin' Resmod
Join date: 3 Apr 2004
Posts: 3,898
|
01-07-2006 14:53
From: Chip Midnight I think there should be a prerequisite quiz people have to take before being allowed to vote in which they must prove a certain level of knowledge about current events, the main issues of the day, and the platforms of the major candidates. If you fail you can't vote. I think we should have one leader who stays in totalitarian power as long as he continues to score well on a televised quiz every two weeks on current events, the main issues of the day, and the platforms of allied and non-allied states. It will be the ultimate reality show.
_____________________
"The mob requires regular doses of scandal, paranoia and dilemma to alleviate the boredom of a meaningless existence."
-Insane Ramblings, Anton LaVey
|
|
Broken Templar
Registered User
Join date: 14 Aug 2004
Posts: 139
|
01-07-2006 15:06
From: Chance Abattoir I think we should have one leader who stays in totalitarian power as long as he continues to score well on a televised quiz every two weeks on current events, the main issues of the day, and the platforms of allied and non-allied states. All hail Ken Jennings!
_____________________
My 3 rules for forum happiness:
Lurk, laugh & Love.
|
|
Introvert Petunia
over 2 billion posts
Join date: 11 Sep 2004
Posts: 2,065
|
01-07-2006 15:13
From: someone Who else can be elected but someone who is electable? Forgive me if I missed sarcasm, but that was my point: the qualities that make one electable may have no relation to their capacity to execute the duties of the position. As for the "knowledge of events" poll-test, it is a good idea in principle, but as Reitsuki put very well in a related (so related, it actually is this one) thread obfuscation is now an essential part of the political sphere and so even if you think you know what is going on, you very well may not. |
|
Joy Honey
Not just another dumass
Join date: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 3,751
|
01-07-2006 15:30
From: Cocoanut Koala Lol, sorry about that Joy. I couldn't help myself. It's the mom in me.
On a more serious note, about being informed, she may well be a great deal more informed than you think. Lots of people can't and don't care to articulate well why they go for one thing rather than the other, but the overal gestalt of things, their gut feelings, their small articulated reasons, the needs that politician or party is speaking to, etc., all add up to why they make the decisions they do. They may not be that into politics, but they can still easily discern, from all the above, who they wish to vote for.
I'm not too into politics, and my eyes glaze over if someone wants me to prove I'm informed, i.e., go very deep into political argument and actually be good at it. When people get to a point in discussing politics with me (I have a friend on the game who often does), and I'm not informed on that aspect, I just say "I don't know." But it doesn't keep me from knowing who I want to vote for, and often being quite certain in that knowledge.
coco is ok. My mom does not seem ever make informed decisions about much of anything. Salespeople love it when she walks in the door... she wouldn't know a bargain if it bit her on the nose, y'know? She bought a brand new car without test driving it, or even looking at any other cars in the lot... does that sound like an informed decision to you? I am a mother and I know I'm going to have my turn to embarrass the crap out of my kids soon enough, just not about things like that - they'll be embarrassed about the old lady with the tattoo or something like that (no I don't have one, just contemplating getting one)
_____________________
Reality continues to ruin my life. - Calvin
You have delighted us long enough. - Jane Austen
Sometimes I need what only you can provide: your absence. - Ashleigh Brilliant
|