Posted by lil' jimi on November 13, 2006, at 11:03:56
In reply to Re: And now, while iron is gold » lil' jimi, posted by Dinah on November 12, 2006, at 12:13:48
> > I guess I don't see the swing vote as all that unstable.
well, for as much as the swing voters themselves may (or may not) be somewhat ‘flaky’, it is the process of choosing which splinter of voters are teh ‘swing voters’ which seems unstable to me. Soccer Moms one cycle, Angry Males the next, et cetera; each chosen as the most likely to Flip Flop or the most nudgeable toward some desired candidate.
and the commandment Thou Shalt Be Highly Electable (while pandering to these most uncommitted voters) does not seem to have moderation as its purpose. Moderation (or moderates) would seem to be as likely as not among of its casualties.
> > I see them more as reactive.
i can see that: they would be expected to be at least more sentient or responsive since they are chosen for their ability to be influenced.
> > When things lean too far one way or another, they exert a pull in the opposite direction. They may or may not be ideological moderates, but they do act as a moderating influence.
i am too cynical to see this as benign nor as effective in the way you suggest.
a large part of my challenge is in trying to see moderates or centerists as uncommitted or undecided, hence swing voters; any such intersection of swing voters with moderation seems purely incidental since we may presume that the party honchos and their political consultant coterie would be just as happy to target a more divisive or even extremist element (once designated as swing voters) as not.
> > I'm not enormously unhappy with the results.
although not tremendously happy either?
i am suggesting that the solution you have proposed seems to me to be a source of the problem we seek to solve.
but, then, i am not as interested in what we are sold as being Highly Electable nor swing voter appealing nor necessarily moderate nor moderating.i’d rather have some one who is extremely wise and extremely honest while still willing to suffer the abuse and assaults that come with public service.
and i see any such candidate as not being seen as highly electable nor as appealing to swing voters. At least not in the view of our current political establishment(s).i can easily imagine such a candidate being seen as dangerous, and being slandered as such.
know what i mean ?
poster:lil' jimi
thread:701735
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20061009/msgs/703110.html