It's 10 months before the first caucuses and primaries will even take place...
20 months before we vote...
23 months before our next President takes office...
So why the hell do I have to be subjected to a daily stream of what the candidates and would be candidates are doing? Why should I care what they say? Because you know that anything they say now is meaningless. Why is Senator Clinton in the race? Why is Senator Obama? Do they think that our being subjected to their daily inanity through the 2008 Iowa Caucus is going to make us more likely to vote for them?
Google lists over a 1000 stories about Clinton and Obama showing up in Selma for a civil rights march. Who cares!? Katrina victims are being evicted from their trailers
! Bush is gearing up for war with Iran
! Republican congressman are colluding with the administration to have capable US Attorneys fired from their jobs
! Pay attention to the nation's business for f*cks! sake.
If you wonder why it is that our voting percentages are so low, look no further than the "endless campaign". By the time an election rolls around, everyone is so exhausted, so cynical, that nobody cares who gets elected to office. The electorate just wants it to end, if only for a few months.
Right on! I am so tired of this crap. On the other hand, some people really don't pay attention until the end. Kind of a last man standing kind of thing.
I want a national primary followed thirty days later by the election. Period.
People would likely pay attention longer if they just went all the way and turned the campaign into a blend of Idol and Top Model. How about "Dancing With America's Next Commander & Chief"?
Make 'em do several fashion shoots, a song, and a dance number. I'll bet McCain loses it at some point and hurls a cellphone at someone.
It occurs to me now that McCain and Romney would have a built-in advantage on "Dancing With America's Next Commander & Chief." McCain has his experience of being on Saturday Night Live, and Romney can call on the Osmonds for coaching.
I couldn't agree more!
It is too soon.
Like Hillary last Friday kissing up to the fags at HRC. It's great that she is advancing (if nothing else) the rhetoric of equality, but why does one have to be a Presidential candidate to discuss such novel ideas as equal rights in America?
And more to your point, as the "war" rages on, and our Dumbya is picking other fights, why aren't they focused on thier jobs and taking care of the nation...Talking is great...But as they say...ACTIONS speak louder than words.
Want to be remembered at the polls, do something for us to remember, don't just talk about what you want to do.
Deb...that would be much like the British system I think. I like the idea of a restricted time frame. I also like the idea of public financing with matching funds and mandatory caps.
Mr_Blog... Idol? Blech. I'd say put em in a Survivor like show but that would be too close to what we do now.
Gary... If a candidate were to stand up and say, "Yes I intend to run, but I'm not going to lift a finger to give a speech until 1 month before the New Hampshire primary. I'll be here doing the country's business," I'd have a lot more respect for 'em.
This is just like the advertisers who begin Christmas commercials earlier and earlier every year, they think it gives them an advantage but I'm already sick of all of 'em.
Exhausted is the right word. Most of the people I know just tune out all this political stuff from the candidates. They'll start paying attention again about 2 months before the election. Americans are notorious for having short attention spans, so politicians should just save the effort and money till crunch time rolls around.
I concur! Put this painful prolonged primary pimping on pause. If people get so burned out by this ceaseless 2-yr barrage that they just vote for the newest face that doesn't make them sick, that will put an end to it. Familiary breeds contempt. I want a little distance between my president & my living room. ~~ D.K.
Has it always been like this or did something change this time? I too pretty much just tune out to all the polls and such. There are more pressing urgent things right now than whether this candidate beats that candidate today. Things like the Walter Reed disaster, for example.
Lew...and put up the decorations before Thanksgiving is even over. Sheesh!
Kathy... But it must be hard on the candidates as well. How can Senators Clinton and Obama believe that they'll have the staying power to make it next January? Unreal!
Familiary breeds contempt. I want a little distance between my president & my living room.
You've got that right. I'm ready to give up on everybody currently in the field. Maybe this is Gore's strategy--wait until the current field has exhausted themselves, then...
PoP... I did change. They started earlier. I don't remember ever seeing anybody campaigning two full years ahead of the election.
I am trying my hardest not to follow all the campaign BS right now. I won't pay attention until the month before the Iowa caucuses when the candidates are actually there and doing the debate thing. Until then, they are just trying to raise money and get noticed. Neither of which I am going to help them with.
Unless Gore would run. Then I would be all over those stories
That's why I pretty much refuse to blog about it. I don't even watch the news that much anymore and I'm a news junkie, dammit. I'm sick of this crap, there are real issues to be delt with.
Folks, you've got it all wrong. It's not what needs to be done in the country that's important. It's the horserace. It's selling advertising. It's the opportunity for pundits to show off their pundacity.
Where you guys been? ;-)
I am trying my hardest not to follow all the campaign BS right now. I won't pay attention until the month before the Iowa caucuses...
But what an enormous waste of time, energy, and money. Fred's right...real issues languish while this sideshow takes place, and Abi's just a grumpy old cynic with a thing for "The Sport of Kings" analogies. :-)
Last I checked, the MSM posts "stories" about this becuase they can sell advertising to their customers. Thus, the real drivers of TV content and media are the commercial interests that foot the bill for this high priced talent that delivers the "news."
You're all right...I'm just here to back up what you said...in spades!
strange country you've got here...
in Canada it's unlikely most people know the spouse's name, the Prime Minister's religion (unless they're French, then it's always Roman Catholic), or any other crap, or really give a damn. An election gets called, and it's over in 6weeks I think?
strange country.... maybe everyone would do a little better with less television, just a thought...
WS... Right you are. I suppose when people get bored with the races, the MSM will leave it alone. The problem is that it'll happen just about when the Iowa caucus happens.
Callooh...oh how I wish we could get it done in six weeks.
Come on people, how is it possible to spend over $300 billion in campaigning if you don't have at least a year and an half to do it? Actually, there is a merrit in the suggestion, that America should have the perpetual campaigns/elections. Those unfortunate between times now, although short, are not good for the economy even if you have a war or two going.
I do follow the issues and try to keep those alive and I also wish we could stop spending money of the candidates and spend it on the electorate. Where is the generosity of all these donors in regards to social issues. And as a benefit, there is no contribution limit for charity donations