Undecided Voters and the Undecided Candidate
by Bob Clasen
_________________________
It is amazing to watch the polls swing back and forth over the past few weeks. The famous “swing voters” are apparently changing their minds. First they were for Kerry, then they switched to Bush, now they are trickling back to Kerry.
Who are these famous “Undecided” voters? These are the people who answer “I don’t know” in answer to political surveys. They are not sure if they are Democrats or Republicans. They are “independent.” They do not have a political philosophy. They are not too clear about what is happening in the world, either. These are the sorts who are not sure if Washington State is on the Atlantic or Pacific ocean. They don’t know who the vice-President is. The can’t say if Iraq is a Moslem country or not, let alone Pakistan or Sudan. They do not know what a “graduated income tax” is.
Kerry is the ideal candidate for such voters. He, too, is not sure what he believes in. It varies from week to week and year to year. He is for one position in 2003 and another in 2004. He is the Flip-flop candidate, the Weather Vane candidate. Is there a better person to represent the famous swing voters, swinging around in the wind to the vagaries of the current political wind?
Perhaps, the Democrats will prevail because the Undecided Voters will ultimately settle on the Undecided Candidate as their natural and fitting representative.
It is a little disturbing to me that these dunderheads are going to decide the election. Democracy is clearly the worst form of political organization . . . . except for every other known form.
____________________________________________
_________________________
It is amazing to watch the polls swing back and forth over the past few weeks. The famous “swing voters” are apparently changing their minds. First they were for Kerry, then they switched to Bush, now they are trickling back to Kerry.
Who are these famous “Undecided” voters? These are the people who answer “I don’t know” in answer to political surveys. They are not sure if they are Democrats or Republicans. They are “independent.” They do not have a political philosophy. They are not too clear about what is happening in the world, either. These are the sorts who are not sure if Washington State is on the Atlantic or Pacific ocean. They don’t know who the vice-President is. The can’t say if Iraq is a Moslem country or not, let alone Pakistan or Sudan. They do not know what a “graduated income tax” is.
Kerry is the ideal candidate for such voters. He, too, is not sure what he believes in. It varies from week to week and year to year. He is for one position in 2003 and another in 2004. He is the Flip-flop candidate, the Weather Vane candidate. Is there a better person to represent the famous swing voters, swinging around in the wind to the vagaries of the current political wind?
Perhaps, the Democrats will prevail because the Undecided Voters will ultimately settle on the Undecided Candidate as their natural and fitting representative.
It is a little disturbing to me that these dunderheads are going to decide the election. Democracy is clearly the worst form of political organization . . . . except for every other known form.
____________________________________________
Comments
I have not swung back and forth about who I am going to vote for. I am waiting until I have as much information as I feel I need (or its election day) to make an informed decision. I think that this is a very responsible way to look at voting, instead of basing ones opinions upon what the media says, or what the random blogger has to say.
Yes, not every undecided voter is undecided for the same reasons I am. But among the people that I know, more than half are undecided for exactly these reasons:
We simply don't know which evil we want to put in office. It is not a matter of choosing the lesser of two evils, because this is not a question of quantity, but of quality. One does not appear to be better than the other, just different. We are not confident that it truly matters who we vote for, as both candidates are severely lacking in all areas. Both candidates have some really huge flaws that have the potential to do irreparable damage to our country. The question is: which form would we like the damage to take? Do we want Kerry to make the US the laughing stock of the globe because he’s too big of a wuss to do what needs to be done in Iraq, and then insults the other countries that are backing us up? Or do we want Bush to make the US the laughing stock of the globe because he still can't decide what it is that we're over there fighting for? Either way, we're a laughing stock right? And it’s like this for just about every issue they choose to debate about, or promote their opinion of. They are so different, and yet so very much the same at the same time.
You must see my dilemma. The questions that I have are not ones that can be answered quickly, or easily. They are questions that take thought, and diligent thought at that. I, for one, don't take the value of my vote lightly, even if the rest of the country (including the electoral college) does. My vote is my chance to express exactly what I want for this country and I am not going to throw that away by expressing someone else’s opinions just because its taking me a while to decide for myself.
I am undecided because I refuse to be a sheep, and I am proud of that.
I don't know if you have followed Bob and my rant for the last several months, but I would suggest that reading the Paul O'Niel Book, Price of Loyalty will tell you a lot about the current administration.
Many like Bob likes what they have been doing. I do not. Forget the retoric. I could go on for days about what I don't like about the neo-cons and the Republican economic policies. Bob would defend all of it.
But is America better off.