Since 1997, you’ve been coming to BarnesandNoble.com to discuss everything from Stephen King to writing to Harry Potter. You’ve made our site more than a place to discover your next book: you’ve made it a community. But like all things internet, BN.com is growing and changing. We've said goodbye to our community message boards—but that doesn’t mean we won’t still be a place for adventurous readers to connect and discover.

Now, you can explore the most exciting new titles (and remember the classics) at the Barnes & Noble Book Blog. Check out conversations with authors like Jeff VanderMeer and Gary Shteyngart at the B&N Review, and browse write-ups of the best in literary fiction. Come to our Facebook page to weigh in on what it means to be a book nerd. Browse digital deals on the NOOK blog, tweet about books with us,or self-publish your latest novella with NOOK Press. And for those of you looking for support for your NOOK, the NOOK Support Forums will still be here.

We will continue to provide you with books that make you turn pages well past midnight, discover new worlds, and reunite with old friends. And we hope that you’ll continue to tell us how you’re doing, what you’re reading, and what books mean to you.

Reply
Distinguished Bibliophile
KathyS
Posts: 6,898
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Personalities : Benefit of the doubt.

I think you're right, policies do matter.  The tricky part is, who (in office) can get these policies implemented?

 

I guess, for me, I see the person first.  If I can't see that person as someone I would like to represent me (in truth, and honesty) I can't see their policies.  Maybe that's backwards, but it works for me.  Although, if they have policies that are way out in left field, figuratively speaking, I couldn't vote for that person, no matter how much acting ability they had! :smileyvery-happy:

 

I always want to believe that people in politics are altruistic, but cynical is what I sometimes end up feeling.  It's hard not to feel that way, when they keep being shown in the negative for their actions.

 

Then, again, I think...."why in the world would someone want to stand up and literally be judged, day in and day out?"  I certainly wouldn't have the stamina for that sort of thing!  Being analyzed and stripped bare, every day of my life?  No, thanks.   It's bad enough that I put my thoughts out here on these boards! LOL

Scribe
debbook
Posts: 1,823
Registered: ‎05-03-2008
0 Kudos

Re: McCain & Obama character analysis.

Linda, I thought you were linking the two thoughts as to compare one of them to Hitler. I know it is easy to misinterpret on this board b/c we aren't face to face. I am in person, an extremely sarcastic person and find I have to check my posts often as I know that sarcasm can be easily misinterpreted without non verbal cues. I promise next time to give you the benefit of the doubt. You should post here more, then we will get to " know " you. No need for a sad smilely:smileyhappy:

Linda10 wrote:

Wow!  A lot happened since I went to bed last night!  I want to respond to Debbook the most because she seems to be the most upset about my post.  (For what it's worth, this is the second time I'm writing this post.  The first time around, I got a "failed" notice.  I'm not quoting Debbook's post in case that was why it failed.)

 

If you read the first 15 posts, yes, people were discussing these psychological profiles of both presidential candidates with respect to how they related to their respective fathers as they were growing up.  Then someone made a post about wondering what Hitler's relationship was like with his father.  Then, later, Vivico posts about how my story of the German soldier made her think of something and she began writing.  Well, that's what I was doing too.  These posts made me think of the story of the German soldier that my friend told me and I thought others here might find it interesting as well.  Then I made a comment about the economic crisis.  I was not implying that either candidate could be compared to Hitler.  If I was implying anything at all, it was that people will approve of/vote for whoever they think will benefit their own pocketbook, (i.e., look what Germans thought of Hitler!)   Perhaps what I should have done was make two different posts, or expand on the one post that I did write.

 

As Vivico also said, sometimes we do better in face-to-face discussions than the written word.  And Everyman made a good point, too, when he said that he wished the election were already over.  Perhaps we're all a little bit fraught over this campaigning.  All I can say is if you knew me, you would never have taken my post in a negative light.  I'm one of those people who proverbially wouldn't even kill a fly.  I hate to upset people, even if it's someone I don't know personally.  So if I've upset you (or anyone) by my post, please believe me that it was never my intent to do so.  If I could make a sad Smiley face on my computer right now, I would.

 


 

A room without books is like a body without a soul.~ Cicero...
"bookmagic418.blogspot.com
Scribe
vivico1
Posts: 3,456
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Personalities : Benefit of the doubt.

I agree with both of you. You really can't look at their policies, or proposed policies without looking at the person and how he or she has handled things in the past and who they are now. How have they handled the type of crises they may have had to, to date? How do they handle disagreements and mud slung at them now? How have they handled defeats in their lives or do they believe they will not have any? You have to look at those things because we all know that they can promise us the moon but this is not a monarchy and once they are President, they may find it nearly impossible to do what they want to do if the congress and senate will not go along. They have more power to stop things by veto than they do to get things going.

 

We heard change change change two years ago and we voted and changed out congress pretty much. What has congress done in two years? Where is the change promised? I can't imagine even wanting to be president and I would hope anyone running is doing so because they feel it would be for the good of the nation. But its not that simple. You can say what you are going to do but that doesn't mean you can achieve it because you are not on your own there. So you do need to think about the person and how he handles things under pressure, how he has or has not continued to fight for things in the past, even in the face of extreme opposition. Their character is going to determine a lot of house the presidency works or doesn't. So you are right, even if both candidates today totally agreed on policies, that doesn't mean the results would be the same, they are different men.

 

Sometimes I wished in our country that the losing candidate could be the VP lol. I know, I know, two different parties, but hey, why can't parties come together for the country like both sides say they want to? It would turn out utter chaos with nothing happening I suppose or it could actually turn out that there would be enough compromise and good ideas from both that if they truly are that concerned with doing good, then maybe what was best for the country would be their combined agenda. It is possible, after all, before the final nominees are picked, look at how those running against each other to be the party ticket tear each other down and say the other would not make a good president and doesn't understand this or that, yet as soon as the one is chosen, here come those opponents then saying just the opposite. That their candidate is the perfect one to be president! If all the maneuvering before a candidate is chosen can be then set aside, why can't the same happen when a president is chosen and the opposition had good ideas too? yes I know, these are fairy tale things but wouldn't it be nice.

 

We are at a scary time in world politics that its hard not to worry about what either side will wind up doing in the long run, not so much because of their stated policies, but because of how they will handle the office at such a time with their different personalities.

 


Everyman wrote:

I agree with you, Jon.

 

Churchill's personal presence was every bit as important as his policies in his ability to lead his country at a time of crisis.

 

Similarly, Lincoln. He faced far more opposition in the North than most people today understand, but his personality was his strength much more than his policies his party's positions on issues.

 

FDR was another such. If you had listened to his platform at the time of his first election you would never have had any conception of the vast changes in our society that he was able, largely through force of personality, to sell to the nation.

 

In all of these cases, a very different person with identical policies and party principles would in all likelihood been a muc, much less effective leader.


Jon_B wrote:

Choisya wrote:

 

IMO we should ignore all the personal remarks about candidates (treat them as ad hominem!:smileyvery-happy:) and concentrate on the policies they and their party are putting forward. It is the policies which will ultimately matter, not the man/woman.


 

I don't think I can agree with this entirely. Policies are extremely important of course, but without personality the effectiveness of getting one's policies in place is severely limited. And history is full of examples of leaders who's personalities were so strong and unique that they had a profound impact on how their policies played out, on how their opponents worked, and in many cases on the culture of the nation in general. And in the contemporary world there are current world leaders who's personality plays a very strong role in how their respective nation is dealt with both on a global level and in the general morale of the nations people themselves.

 

Vladimir Putin, I think, is a prominent example of this. While his politicies are of course extremely important in terms of their affect on Russia and how the world sees Russia, there's little question that he's managed to build up something of a cult of personality and that the strong pride many Russians feel in having him as a leader is leading to a more nationalistic and potentially aggressive Russia. His use of images of himself in the state media as a physically active outdoorsman and martial arts expert is a stark contrast to Yeltsin's... well, there are not many polite ways to describe Yeltsin's public image :smileywink: . And I think these personalities and the images based on these personalities have as profound an impact on the direction of Russia as their policies have.

 

 


 

 


 

 

Vivian
~Those who do not read are no better off than those who can not.~ Chinese proverb
Scribe
debbook
Posts: 1,823
Registered: ‎05-03-2008
0 Kudos

Re: McCain & Obama character analysis.


Jon_B wrote:

Everyman wrote:

 

I wish the time between now and the election would pass as quickly as summer seems to.  Zip, gone.  


 
Well consider yourself lucky - the US election is in just a few weeks now.  But after that I'm afraid my neighborhood will continue to suffer from election fever, as most of my neighbors are quite passionately involved in the election in Bangladesh - which, it seems to me, is even more heated than our own (and has already been delayed for over a year due to various protests and threats) and which isn't until mid-December. 
Bite your tongue, Jon:smileyvery-happy: If our election were to be delayed for even a week, I would crawl into bed and stay there until it was over, and then some, to recover from the trauma.
A room without books is like a body without a soul.~ Cicero...
"bookmagic418.blogspot.com
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Personalities : Benefit of the doubt.

Thanks Jon.  I do not think it is safe to build up a picture of a person based on media reporting because the media has other agendas.  I have seen the media destroy the reputation of very nice politicians.  In fact one of the nicest and best British politicians I have known in my lifetime was destroyed by the way the media portayed him.  

 

How safe is any 'cult of personality' such as Putin projects?  Hitler projected his personality well too. So did 'Uncle' Stalin.  I find it safer to rely on deeds and policies together with biographies by reliable historians, rather than on  media 'gossip'.  The manifesto of a political party is more important to me than any personality because that personality is often a 'front' and nowadays one that has been dreamt up by a PR firm.  All leaders in the modern world manipulate their image, not just Putin. 

 

We live in democracies and it isn't the vote of one man which gets the policies through - it is the vote of an assembly acting on the speeches and policies put before that assembly.. The leaders we see on our TV are constructs - of the media and of their parties.  In a way they are not real.  They may seem to be leading but it is the combined actions and will of the parties behind them which direct the government, affect us and, in the case of the US, affect the world.  What does matter today in a leader is 'charisma' and the way he/she present themselves on the world stage.  This is particularly true of America whose leaders have such global influence.  IMO they can have a rotten 'personality', be mean to their wives and their dogs but if they present themselves well and have party policies which will improve the lot of  the majority they, together with their specialist political advisors, will win the day and hopefully make for a better nation and a better world.  I say 'hopefully' because politics is the 'art of the possible' and the things we want from governments aren't always possible. 

 

But we will probably have to agree to differ because no doubt my British viewpoint is a very different one to yours:smileyhappy:.      

 

 

 


Jon_B wrote:

Choisya wrote:

 

IMO we should ignore all the personal remarks about candidates (treat them as ad hominem!:smileyvery-happy:and concentrate on the policies they and their party are putting forward.  It is the policies which will ultimately matter, not the man/woman.

 

 

I don't think I can agree with this entirely.  Policies are extremely important of course, but without personality the effectiveness of getting one's policies in place is severely limited.  And history is full of examples of leaders who's personalities were so strong and unique that they had a profound impact on how their policies played out, on how their opponents worked, and in many cases on the culture of the nation in general.  And in the contemporary world there are current world leaders who's personality plays a very strong role in how their respective nation is dealt with both on a global level and in the general morale of the nations people themselves. 

 

Vladimir Putin, I think, is a prominent example of this.  While his politicies are of course extremely important in terms of their affect on Russia and how the world sees Russia, there's little question that he's managed to build up something of a cult of personality and that the strong pride many Russians feel in having him as a leader is leading to a more nationalistic and potentially aggressive Russia.   His use of images of himself in the state media as a physically active outdoorsman and martial arts expert is a stark contrast to Yeltsin's... well, there are not many polite ways to describe Yeltsin's public image :smileywink: .  And I think these personalities and the images based on these personalities have as profound an impact on the direction of Russia as their policies have. 

 

 


 

Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Personalities : Benefit of the doubt.

The manifesto of a political party is more important to me than any personality because that personality is often a 'front' and nowadays one that has been dreamt up by a PR firm. 

 

That may be because I believe that British politicians (and perhaps other European politicians) take their party platforms seriously, and are expected to vote in line with their platform and party leaders.  

 

Over here, it's different.  Almost no voter reads or even knows where to find information about the party platform.  The candidates for a party are not bound by the party platform, and it is seldom that we get a straight party vote in either branch of Congress.  

 

I just downloaded a copy of the Democratic party platform for 2008 from this site.  For starters, the thing is 59 pages long -- do you realistically think any verage voter is going to read a 59 page party platform so they can vote on the basis of what the party's manifesto is?  

 

I brought up page 51 at random.  There we find : "If we are to renew America, we must do a better job of investing in the next generation of Americans. For parents, the first and most sacred responsibility is to support our children: setting an example of excellence, turning off the TV, and helping with the homework. 

 

That's going to help anybody decide to vote for a given candidate???   Is any candidate for any party going to disagree with that?  And if the party does believe that, what do they expect legislators and the political process to do to implement that policy?  Are they proposing to legislate a maximum number of hours a child will be allowed to watch TV, and any more than will constitute child abuse for which a parent can be held responsible?  Are parents going to be punished for not helping their children with homework?  

 

Political pablum is what I call that statement.  It won't help a whit deciding who to vote for because it's  meaningless drivel as far as what any elected politician is going to do once elected is concerned.  

_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Personalities : Benefit of the doubt.

Maybe our manifestos are taken seriously but they are just as long.  However, the media here takes them up point by point in a run up to an election and the parties do TV and radio broadcasts on them, point by point.  We also have abbreviated versions of them officially posted to us as part of the election material parties are allowed to spend money on.   

 

I saw a TV programme recently where an American candidate was visiting a home somewhere in a party atmosphere - a barbeque I think.  That was quite a nice way for people to get to meet a candidate and make a real assessment of character.  Far better than the huge razz-a-ma-tazz meetings I keep seeing on TV.  One of our parties once arranged one of those for their leader to attend and it went down like a bomb with TV audiences and was cited as the reason he lost the election  - "too triuimphalist" was the reason given by voters..    

 

You have only posted a Democrat manifesto.  Here is the Republican Party one so that folks can make a comparison.  Maybe that is 'meaningless drivel' too:smileyvery-happy:


 

 

Everyman wrote:

The manifesto of a political party is more important to me than any personality because that personality is often a 'front' and nowadays one that has been dreamt up by a PR firm. 

 

That may be because I believe that British politicians (and perhaps other European politicians) take their party platforms seriously, and are expected to vote in line with their platform and party leaders.  

 

Over here, it's different.  Almost no voter reads or even knows where to find information about the party platform.  The candidates for a party are not bound by the party platform, and it is seldom that we get a straight party vote in either branch of Congress.  

 

I just downloaded a copy of the Democratic party platform for 2008 from this site.  For starters, the thing is 59 pages long -- do you realistically think any verage voter is going to read a 59 page party platform so they can vote on the basis of what the party's manifesto is?  

 

I brought up page 51 at random.  There we find : "If we are to renew America, we must do a better job of investing in the next generation of Americans. For parents, the first and most sacred responsibility is to support our children: setting an example of excellence, turning off the TV, and helping with the homework. 

 

That's going to help anybody decide to vote for a given candidate???   Is any candidate for any party going to disagree with that?  And if the party does believe that, what do they expect legislators and the political process to do to implement that policy?  Are they proposing to legislate a maximum number of hours a child will be allowed to watch TV, and any more than will constitute child abuse for which a parent can be held responsible?  Are parents going to be punished for not helping their children with homework?  

 

Political pablum is what I call that statement.  It won't help a whit deciding who to vote for because it's  meaningless drivel as far as what any elected politician is going to do once elected is concerned.  


 

Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: McCain & Obama character analysis.

The Washintgton Post is not known for as a conservative paper -- quite the opposite, it's usually ranked by conservatives closely below the NYT and LA Times as liberal papers -- so it was particularly interesting that it was th Post which highlighted this study showing that the press coverage of McCain is "much more negative" than that of Obama. 
_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: McCain & Obama character analysis.

Things are getting totally out of hand. 
_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Frequent Contributor
Jon_B
Posts: 1,893
Registered: ‎07-15-2008
0 Kudos

Re: McCain & Obama character analysis.

[ Edited ]

I'm just dropping a note here to say that I've moved the discussions of technical issues out of this thread and put them in the "Technical Questions" thread in the Help forum in order to keep this one on topic.

 

 

Message Edited by Jon_B on 10-23-2008 02:03 PM
________________________________________

Need some help setting up your My B&N profile? Click here!

Looking for a particular book, but can't remember the title or author? Ask about it here!
Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: McCain & Obama character analysis.

[ Edited ]

And even uglier.

 

More on that:

 

 

What is going on with our country?

 

 

Message Edited by Everyman on 10-23-2008 06:21 PM
_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Inspired Bibliophile
thewanderingjew
Posts: 2,247
Registered: ‎12-18-2007
0 Kudos

Re: McCain & Obama character analysis.

This is a horribly contentious election and certain comments in the news from journalists, religious leaders, political pundits and representatives, legislators and entertainers, have combined and acted to incite rather than calm the fears and concerns of the public that, at this time, may be wrongly acting out, out of unjustifiable anger and frustration encouraged by foolhardy remarks.
I do not believe that the negative comments have been addressed properly or adequately enough to stem the angry tide and/or stop the continuing ridiculous insulting statements that keep on coming. I hope it will be addressed soon because one of the candidates will be elected and the other will not. I would hope that peace will reign on the day after the victor is declared and we can all join together in support of whomever that will be.

twj

Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: McCain & Obama character analysis.

Regrettably, I don't see either candidate having the ability to cross the aisle and work in a bipartisan manner.  And if Obama wins, Pelosi will certainly not do that; she is reliably contentious and hostile to the Republican minority. 

 

So no, sadly, I don't see either one of these candidates being able to unite the country and start to heal these divisions.  

_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Scribe
vivico1
Posts: 3,456
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: McCain & Obama character analysis.

The things you have shown Everyman, we have had incidences here in Oklahoma too, of people and homes being attacked because of their signs in their yards of who they will vote for. I worry. I worry for our nation, and for the world because of our nation. I worry too that whoever wins this election may be a target from within our own nation, like a few presidents before. I pray they have the best of secret service around them when they are elected, more than years past. This is just all nuts.

 

I have been verbally abused, badly, for my religion by those who would also call themselves Christians, now I have even been receiving phone calls, pretty weird ones, a few scary, every since the democratic party called me to make sure I get out and vote and I said this year, I am voting a straight ticket, Republican. (In all actuality, I registered Democrat in college when a professor showed us how you can get to vote more that way than by any other here and then vote whatever you want.) I don't remember how it worked, I just know that in this state it did but I rarely vote a straight ticket anyway, I try to research who is up and for what. Tho, I guess I would really be considered a Republican by my voting record. I don't think sharing this is something sacred, not to be discussed, meaning what I am registered as, like some people feel. I don't ask people, but I don't care who knows who I am voting for. Well, until now. Its a bit scary and I am not saying the democratic party is now harassing me, but what if that really wasn't one of their pollers after all, just some idiot who does know now and is local? I told them tonight I am putting a trap on my phone tomorrow morning with an automatic prosecution order on it. (I used to work for Bell and that's what we called a trace, "a trap" and when people signed that the person could be prosecuted, you never were informed of the case or outcome, if they were found, it was just automatically done, this was mostly for obscene phone calls. This kind of stuff now days , you may be involved with.) This is all just nuts. Not democracy at its best. Not Americans at our best.

 

I do pray for our leaders and our nation each night. And this year more than ever before, I pray that who I vote for is right cause I just don't know what to think this time. I wish there was a real third choice this time. And I hate that all I really feel now is that I just want the election over with now.

Vivian
~Those who do not read are no better off than those who can not.~ Chinese proverb
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Healing the divide.

Then heaven help America!  Are you going to put a divided and bitter face to the world?  Are these people not responsible adults who can put their country before their party?  What is fuelling this hatred?  The Press?  Racism?  Money/the Economy?  Why is this election worse than those which have gone before (if it is)?  Is it because one of the candidates is black?  Can anyone here stand back from partisan politics and give a rational answer to these questions?   

 

I am a dyed in the wool lifetime Socialist but there is no way I would take such an attitude to any Conservative candidate who participated in an election and in a lifetime of political work I have never seen such an attitude being taken by a British politician.   So I very much hope that you are wrong and are perhaps projecting your own partisan feelings.  America needs to look good after this election and the world (and the world economy!) needs it to have a confident, united front.

 

   

 


Everyman wrote:

Regrettably, I don't see either candidate having the ability to cross the aisle and work in a bipartisan manner.  And if Obama wins, Pelosi will certainly not do that; she is reliably contentious and hostile to the Republican minority. 

 

So no, sadly, I don't see either one of these candidates being able to unite the country and start to heal these divisions.  


 

Distinguished Bibliophile
KathyS
Posts: 6,898
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

smear tactics

I'm going to take a step back, and look at this, hopefully objectively.  I think this is abominable, these attacks on these people!  Period.  I don't care what the party, or who is doing it.  I agree, there needs to be a more forceful comment made to people who commit these crimes.  Period.

 

But, there is another way you can see it.  I'll play the devils advocate:

Because these attacks on these people were seemingly from the Democratic party, towards the Republican party....  Makes it appear that they originated from the Democratic party.  Right? These people, no matter who they are, are radical, rogue, supporters, of which ever party is initiating these attacks..... which in my estimation are  not representative of the party, itself.  They are nut case, which may also be hired!

 

But, what if they are McCain supporters, trying to smear the Democratic candidate, Obama, by doing these horrible things, making it LOOK like it's from the Obama camp?  These people can, and do, reverse these so called apparent situations, whether hired, or not.  I'm just giving an alternative to this thought.  Until these people are apprehended, who knows who they are.  Again, I'm not condoning it!

 

Last night,  I received an email from a friend of mine, it was sent to me by mistake.   She was sending it to her Republican friends.   It was horrible, and aimed at Obama.  It was slanderous, and made accusations that were unbelievable!  I was horrified by it.   It wouldn't have mattered if John McCain's name was on it, instead of Obama's!  It still would have had the same impact on me!   I didn't sleep, thinking about it. 

 

This morning I got on the internet and found it to be an email that is part of a smear campaign by some idiot.  Who this person is, I have no idea.  But he made it sound like what was said, to be legitimate, and real, about this candidate.  But not one word of it was true, I found out.

 

I emailed my friend and told her she should research her sources before she sends this S*** out!!  I was furious.  I sent her the proof.   She emailed me back, and said she had sent it to me by mistake, it was only meant to go to her Republican followers.  "oops, sorry, Disregard it!  I didn't want to get into an argument over this, so I emailed her back, and said this,

Fellow rep., you don't want to perpetuate that kind of junk.  It's a little hard to disregard slanderous garbage.

What else can you say to your friends who think it's a good idea to send stuff like that?  I honestly was afraid to say anything more, because I was still angry.   I could copy and paste it  to here, but I don't want to stoop to that.  I don't want anyone to read it, and think it's real.

 

I did send her the article that showed that that email was purely bogus.  So, do we have to research everything we read?  It claimed to be an interview with Obama, on Meet The Press, Sept 7.  I don't watch all of these programs, but I had a gut feeling that something like this would have made the WORLD PRESS!  It was just that outrageous!  But never the less, it still hit me emotionally.  Now I have to figure out how to bring this up to my friend, tomorrow, and talk to her about it.   I really can't let something like this slide.  Gads!

Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: smear tactics

The past day or two happens to have been presumably Democratic fanatics attacking Republicans; I'm sure there is the opposite going on that I'm not privy to.  (I reject the idea that either party is doing this to their own supporters to target the other; these seem more to be crimes of momentary passion rather than well thought out strategic events.)

 

But I don't recall such vitrolic violence in any past election of my memory.

 

Is it possible that the rejection of public funding, and therefore the flood of much more money for negative ads than was ever available in the past, is an element of this?  I don't know, but I certainly think it's possible.

 

 

_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Inspired Contributor
Choisya
Posts: 10,782
Registered: ‎10-26-2006
0 Kudos

Re: smear tactics

Well said KathyS and well done!!   If everyone does their bit not to spread this sort of vitriol, it will help both the campaigns and America.  Even the nastier posts here are like such emails and add to the negative campaigning.  If they are read they can be spread!  It is like ad hominem arguments (:smileyvery-happy::smileyvery-happy:), folks should attack the arguments/policies, not the people putting them forward. You can disagree with folks and still be reasonable, as you have shown with your friend.   

 

 


KathyS wrote:

I'm going to take a step back, and look at this, hopefully objectively.  I think this is abominable, these attacks on these people!  Period.  I don't care what the party, or who is doing it.  I agree, there needs to be a more forceful comment made to people who commit these crimes.  Period.

 

But, there is another way you can see it.  I'll play the devils advocate:

Because these attacks on these people were seemingly from the Democratic party, towards the Republican party....  Makes it appear that they originated from the Democratic party.  Right? These people, no matter who they are, are radical, rogue, supporters, of which ever party is initiating these attacks..... which in my estimation are  not representative of the party, itself.  They are nut case, which may also be hired!

 

But, what if they are McCain supporters, trying to smear the Democratic candidate, Obama, by doing these horrible things, making it LOOK like it's from the Obama camp?  These people can, and do, reverse these so called apparent situations, whether hired, or not.  I'm just giving an alternative to this thought.  Until these people are apprehended, who knows who they are.  Again, I'm not condoning it!

 

Last night,  I received an email from a friend of mine, it was sent to me by mistake.   She was sending it to her Republican friends.   It was horrible, and aimed at Obama.  It was slanderous, and made accusations that were unbelievable!  I was horrified by it.   It wouldn't have mattered if John McCain's name was on it, instead of Obama's!  It still would have had the same impact on me!   I didn't sleep, thinking about it. 

 

This morning I got on the internet and found it to be an email that is part of a smear campaign by some idiot.  Who this person is, I have no idea.  But he made it sound like what was said, to be legitimate, and real, about this candidate.  But not one word of it was true, I found out.

 

I emailed my friend and told her she should research her sources before she sends this S*** out!!  I was furious.  I sent her the proof.   She emailed me back, and said she had sent it to me by mistake, it was only meant to go to her Republican followers.  "oops, sorry, Disregard it!  I didn't want to get into an argument over this, so I emailed her back, and said this,

Fellow rep., you don't want to perpetuate that kind of junk.  It's a little hard to disregard slanderous garbage.

What else can you say to your friends who think it's a good idea to send stuff like that?  I honestly was afraid to say anything more, because I was still angry.   I could copy and paste it  to here, but I don't want to stoop to that.  I don't want anyone to read it, and think it's real.

 

I did send her the article that showed that that email was purely bogus.  So, do we have to research everything we read?  It claimed to be an interview with Obama, on Meet The Press, Sept 7.  I don't watch all of these programs, but I had a gut feeling that something like this would have made the WORLD PRESS!  It was just that outrageous!  But never the less, it still hit me emotionally.  Now I have to figure out how to bring this up to my friend, tomorrow, and talk to her about it.   I really can't let something like this slide.  Gads!


 

Scribe
vivico1
Posts: 3,456
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: smear tactics

Kathy,

I have gotten things in the email too that are from people I know, saying horrible things about Obama, just because they know or figure I am voting for McCain and so they think I will get on the band wagon and pass on this crap or find some of the most horrendous jokes about him funny! All these supposedly funny emails that always say pass it on. Everytime I see one, I reply to whoever sends them that maybe if they can pass on things in such poor taste about another person, or things reported as true and all they know is that it was passed to them, and they believe it or feel they are funny, then maybe they need to take a look inside themselves and ask why they could pass on such things to anyone about anyone like this and still consider themselves above those they are putting down. I have told them, please do not pass on anymore forwards to me at all about either side, that are things like this because I want to believe you are above such things and each one is making that harder for me to do. Also, just to be clear on some of this, what is happening here, is not just against Republicans. I just now heard on the news about more houses vandalized and now they were people who had signs out on their lawns for Obama. This is happening on both sides. I don't think people are hurting people on their own side, to make it look like the other side, you could scare off your own voters that way. But I do believe its nutjobs from both sides of the fence. As for the actual parties themselves, I don't think they are directly involved but they are doing enough bashing on tv and ads themselves. But you and I both know that their hate ads add fuel to the fire of these idiots who are doing things on their own or as groups.

 

Choisya,

I think there are so many reasons for all this going on now, that you can't pin it down to just one. Yes, we have to admit that some of it is racism and yes we have to admit that some of it is sexism because its true, unfortunately. This is a time too of so much fear about what is going to happen to people's jobs, their homes, their money, their health, that cooler heads are not prevailing right now when an election is going on too. Each candidate has found things to blame on the other. Then some people blow these things up, add to them, use them to discredit, or try to, the person they don't want in the white house. It is the fear of the unknown being constantly fueled by each candidates sides and the media itself of course. The news used to report events and is supposed to be objective but its not. I watched both of the last two debates and then listened to the comments by the newsmen and political analysts on two different channels, NBS and CBS. They were so opposite over the exact same speeches just made moments before that you could see which station was for whom. The American household has been hit so hard in the pocket book in the last couple of years especially, with gas prices, grocery prices and the housing problems, people don't know who to believe now and this long election has worn on everyone. One of the worst human traits is a need to place blame somewhere and all the crap that goes on during an election just adds to that. I am in hopes that once all this is over, that people will calm down but with what they say about the economy problems continuing into next year, even with the bailouts, there will be many people still scared and angry and looking for someone to blame or even hurt. But we hope. We hope that first the madness will calm down and then, that the promises of bipartisan work will really happen. I hope that humaneness, humanity, comes back into just being a human.

Vivian
~Those who do not read are no better off than those who can not.~ Chinese proverb
Inspired Bibliophile
thewanderingjew
Posts: 2,247
Registered: ‎12-18-2007
0 Kudos

Re: smear tactics

Kathy, when you told your friend that the email was untrue, was she upset only because she sent it to you by mistake or was she going to correct her email to her friends and let them know it was false? If she was continuing to send false emails I would be angry too.

However, I received the same type of email from a Democrat trashing McCain/Palin. I emailed my friend  and explained that I don't mind getting information if it is true but don't send me false information. I corrected the email for her but the following day, she broadcast the same email to me again, uncorrected. I received that email once a week, at least, for several weeks and then I sent my correction to reply to all and emailed the source of the email as well with my comments. They finally stopped coming to me, but I have no idea if they stopped sending them altogether or just stopped sending it to me.
They did publish a little correction on their website but they still continued to send out hate emails and asked for petitions, etc. It is on both sides of the aisle.

I think this election is so hateful because of what I see exhibited in some of my friends. They haven't gotten over the defeat in the 2000 election and they have been harboring hate for 8 years. They don't want to hear anything or learn anything, That defeat convinced them that they were robbed in 2004 also. It eats a hole in a person, when they are that angry or unhappy.
They do not want to lose under any circumstances and many said they would vote for a frog rather than lose to their opponents. Hmmm, that's mature, isn't it?
twj