The 12 months which proceed contested presidential elections have historically been nasty. The Swift-boating we saw in the last election was nothing, really, compared to other previous elections in which all kinds of dirty tricks were employed.
"Push polling" is one of my least favorite and is when an opponent or group attempts to sway opinion or plant information (true or untrue) about the other candidate. As most people are suggestible, these push polls can do terrible damage.
An example would be this:
We are doing a poll to determine what the strengths and weaknesses are of the two candidates, Mr. X and Mr. Z, who are running for the same house seat.
Would you vote for a democrat who is a pedophile?
Would you vote for a republican who is a teacher?
You get the drift. Imply bad things and then the person has to wonder, why did they ask that? Is he a pedophile? They wouldn't ask that kind of thing if he wasn't. Wow. I'm not voting for him!
It is a disgusting tricky way to run an election, but power and money corrupt. Then throw in egos and ideology and evangelism and under-education or arrogance, and you have a mess.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 62
I agree with you, politics is nasty business!!
Anyway, I urge you to do the following when faced with a polling call.
1.) The people doing it have crappy jobs. Don't be rude to them personally.
2.) A good thing to do is ask them to hold on for a second, you are changing phones and then ignore them. They will hang up but for a few minutes anyway they are out of commission to the rest of the world and you will at least have prevented one other person from having their dinner disrupted and the universe will reward you.
3.) If they ask, "how are you, Mrs Madrigal" TELL THEM. Example "you know how some mornings, it seems like it's going fine but then some little thing goes wrong and you wonder. Well, this morning I was looking for the stupid cap on the toothpaste. I could not imagine where it got to and let me tell you, if there is one thing I hate, it's no cap on the toothpaste. I guess it's because...." you get the idea.
4.) Finally, if you do decide to participate, question the question. Q: "If you knew the current congress woman abuses kittens, would you vote for her?" Ask "how old are the kittens" or "what's a congress woman?" Keep it up.
In all seriousness, these polls are driving our democracy down the tubes and any guerrilla action to disrupt them is legitimate, except being insulting to the poor schlub calling you.
Oh, on a corollary note, when a stranger expresses interest in the state of your immortal soul, pretend you never heard of Jesus. They have no idea how to answer. They need to stop interrogating too.
Politics is politics....It always seems to be especially nasty among democrats. Go figure.......
Every time a Republican wins an election it's "FRAUD...voterfraud, the elctions were stolen!"
Every time a Democrat politician's record is critisized it's "THE VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY!"
It's disturbing.
Who is going to call, Teresa? I'm not sure I get your comment. I believe that there have to be a few dumbed down voters. In fact, there were about 52 million of them who voted for GWB in 2004.
There isn't any point in rubbing their noses in it because so many of them are already suffering the consequences of their actions. Jobs lost, soldiers killed and wounded over oil, suspects tortured breaking all internationally recognized human treatment guidelines and laws, social programs slashed, medical expenses soaring, etc.
I'm sorry if people voted for Bush's 'compassionate conservatism' and were deceived. I'm sorry for them and I'm sorry for our children and grandchildren and I'm sorry for me. There has been a terribly disturbing and disgusting display of power and disregard of our laws over the last seven years. Sometimes I am afraid to even say things like that, because I know George Bush can decide I'm a terrorist and put me away or torture me and have no consequences. The paper shredders have been going wild in the White House and by the time there is a new president, there won't be a shred of evidence, but that doesn't mean these things aren't happening. I'm hoping somebody with some guts and some proof and not afraid of being jailed or 'disappeared' will eventually surface.
Some of the people who voted in 2000 and 2004 were interested in only a couple of basic issues and were willing to trade the other things off for legislation and judicial appointments that have turned the clock back for all of us. I still have a right to that opinion, don't I? Many people felt very passionately about things I consider incredibly backward, but that is their right as well. Inhumane in my opinion, but that is where our life philosophies differ. I don't believe in the death penalty, but I am in the minority in this country it appears from our horrible record of executions.
I respect what other people believe, but I love this country because we have the Constitutionally-given right to our own private beliefs or non-beliefs. I have lived outside the country and I know what these rights really mean. There is no place I would rather live and no prouder person than I am about being American. Which is why what we are now doing is making me sick.
It is our Constitution that has made this country great. Tearing it apart and allowing fear to trump freedom lets the terrorists win. I have forgiven the voters who made a mistake. I have forgiven myself for not volunteering in the last two elections more than I did. I cannot forgive the Bushes and this administration, however, but I pray every day that at some point I can.
If I had known how important it would become and how many innocent lives would be lost because of failed Bush policies? I would have done more. I'm only one person, but for 2008 I have made a promise to myself. If I have to volunteer every minute I am not working to get my candidate elected, I will.
Thanks for all your comments, everybody. I respect your right to make them, even if I disagree with some of them. Emotions are high, but we can all be civil.
Are dems innocent of this? No. But i think it is notable that Karl Rove took it to a whole new level. And all of it was deniable and under the radar screen. Bush did not have to defend his own practice of sitting out Vietnam, because he was not the one accusing Kerry of exaggerating his own record. but comeon here, which guy had spent time in 'Nam getting shot at? Really? And it really was Bush who was insulting his opponent, it was just off the record. Please have the honesty to admit it when you are making a personal attack.
The bottom line is that it makes us all look like cattle when this works. And the pols and the lobbyists are all grinning and taking notes- of both parties.
then Bush. Bush appointed several at O'Neils law firm to fed. agencies. A bunch of Neocon Navy veterans got on board but told completely different stories that the ones praising Kerry during his service.
O'Neil is an idiot. He was an idiot in the 1970s and didn't seem to learn much during his life by the 2000s.
Why is it that everytime someone disagrees with a liberal they are being divisive?
It takes two sides to make a divide idiot.
Everything you say is as equally divisive as those who disagree with you.
So you're saying anyone who isn't a liberal isn't educated, knowledgable or for the betterment of society?
Joe is merely trying to get us to see the error of our ways by providing examples of behavior only a non-liberal would engage in.
What behvaiors would those be exactly Rex? Again are you implying that anyone who isn't a liberal behaves in error in everything that they do/
By it's very definition it takes two sides to have a divide. Right and wrong are not concerned at all but the mere fact that two sides have opposing views dictates that both sides are creating the divide and not one because of some defect in their argument as Joe would have us believe.
Joe come's across as the stereotypical arrogant, elitist leftist and based on your last comment you don't sound much better.
Of course, there are some things we liberals tolerate which I'm not crazy about either, but those should be solved when we restore our Constitutional rights during the next administration.
Oh, and by the way, statistically-speaking the average republican is less educated than the average liberal. Hence, our concern about providing a great public education to all students, greater access to health care, etc., should be of even more concern to the conservatives. I believe that if many of the conservatives in this country were exposed to greater intellectual freedom they would realize they'd been duped and misinformed by the majority of their chosen candidates. I won't even go into hypocrisy issues, as you are entitled to your opinion, and nobody should grossly generalize - even yours truly.
The following two links to the Pew Institute of Research make my case for me:
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=949
This first classifies the types of groups that they then identify in this next article.
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=945
This second link has the information I am quoting below:
"Liberals have the highest education level of any typology group 49% are college graduates and 26% have some postgraduate education. But the Enterprisers also include a relatively high percentage of college graduates (46%), although fewer Enterprisers than Liberals have attended graduate school (14%).
Pro-Government Conservatives stand out among Republican groups for their modest incomes. About half (49%) have annual household incomes of less than $30,000; just 13% of Enterprisers and 26% of Social Conservatives have incomes in that range. Pro-Government Conservatives' annual household incomes are comparable to those of Disadvantaged Democrats and Bystanders, and much lower than those of other GOP groups.
Huge disparities in education also divide both Democratic and Republican typology groups. Just 13% of Disdvantaged Democrats have completed college (9% college grads, 4% postgraduate), compared with nearly half of Liberals. Educational differences between Liberals and Conservative Democrats are nearly as large (49% vs. 16%).
Among Republicans, just 15% of Pro-Government Conservatives have completed college, compared with 45% of Enterprisers. There also are wide disparities in education among the three independent groups, with Upbeats (37%) far more likely to have completed college than Bystanders (13%) or Disaffecteds (11%)."
This institute is supposed to be non-partisan, so read it yourselves.
Other countries, like Switzerland, are real democracies. Their primary season is weeks (not years long) and then everybody votes. No backward electoral college, which our founders instituted in case they didn't like the popular election result. Of course, they didn't let anyone but white men vote then, most owned slaves and women were not even allowed to own property in their own names. Nobody could spell the word diversity... never mind a lifestyle with the word in it.
Must have been a 'dream' life which some misguided souls seem to think of as 'the good old days'. Shudder, shudder, shudder....!
First - prove it.
Second - what a snooty, elitist comment to make. And I thought all good liberals were open minded and tolerent.
Tell you what Elizabeth, why don't you take a look at most major cities over the past 40 or so years? Most of them are far worse now than they were before. Most of these cities also have had the same party and philosophy in charge of them for all that time - Democrat and liberal.
You can talk about the liberals being smarter all you want, Elizabeth, but when you keep electing the same types of people and hope that their will be change from what has gone on before, well, that's kind of like the definition of...
The only major city that had a Repbulican and non-liberal recently was NYC.
Now let's look at a comparison of the results between NYC and say Philadelphia, Detroit, Chicago, etc. - nahhhh, why should we do that? It will only make you depressed.
Sorry if you don't like the way I express myself or the way the Pew Institute does, but
nobody said anything about a higher education making someone a better person. If you read that into the comment, re-read it. This was merely about education and educated voters and ignorance getting in the way of the common good.
Again, my point was merely to point out that the more educated a person becomes the more likely they will become a liberal. Maybe there's some academia-inspired conspiracy. (That was a joke.)
If I offended either of you, I apologize.
The reason I included the link information was so that people could read the whole thing themselves if they cared to do so. That was my attempt not to just quote without giving people the full information.
I do believe that most people will benefit from higher education in broadening their views and I hold those people to a higher standard truthfully, as I think they should know better. That is my personal view and my personal experience. It doesn't mean I don't respect people without a higher education, as there are all kinds of intelligence and all kinds of amazing people out there who didn't follow that path for one reason or another.
On the statistics, I also looked for different figures, but I was trying to find something that was compiled by a non-partisan group. I have no idea how the questions were asked or what was asked, or even how to evaluate that.
According to an article in Newsweek this week, only 20% of us in the country even care about politics, and the rest are 'turned off and tuned out'. They state that those who care are vigorously partisan, and I confess I am in that category. I do try to respect others' views but I will take my lumps if I step over the line.
Again, sorry if I offended as that was not my intention.
However, I did teach in a city school for three years. Although I enjoyed the children enormously, it was one of the most stressful and draining jobs I have ever had. If there was any problem at all, it was some of the parents, who were the greatest disappointment. They were either doing the kid's homework for him/her, working 55 hours or 60 a week or completely self-centered and off doing their own thing, letting the kid sink or swim. I don't think the schools should be in charge of raising our kids, but some parents were tired I guess and didn't have it to give.
It is a mystery to me why so many city schools have declined into such a mess, but many teachers are as demoralized as the students. The new theory is that the parents are too demanding and expect perfection from the teachers, but little from their kids. I have no idea as I have been out of teaching for 15 years.
As you brought up New York City? I'm pretty sure I read recently that New Yorkers spend more dollars per student to educate their kids than any other area in the country and get a good return with regard to those who enter higher education. According to their district's website, the NYC figures for 2003-2004 per student range from District 26 at $9997 to District 5 at $14078, with a average of $12,459. (Source: http://www.nycenet.edu/offices/d_chanc_oper/budget/exp01/y2003_2004/CSD_HS.asp)
Oddly, that is the last year they publish the information, but more recent figures from another site showed a much lower amount. Who knows if they are correct, but here they are with some comparisons. Perhaps I shouldn't make any judgments on these amounts compared to 2007 figures below, as the classifications of what is an expenditure might be different.
According to Sperling's Best Places site, the current figure in NYC is $7964. Hmmmmm.
According to Sperling's Best Places site, Portland, Oregon spends $7269 per student and the US average is $6058. (source: http://www.bestplaces.net/City/Portland_OR-OVERVIEW-54159000000.aspx)
According to that same site, Atlanta spends $6992, Nashville-Davidson spends $6416, Manchester, New Hampshire spends $5157 (although their population is just over $100,000), Boston spends $10,526 and so on.
My own town (from the sites www.greatschools.net and www.insideschools.org), which is a tiny place, spends $6065 per student, which is $7 above the national average according to that site. I have no idea if the Sperling site uses a different set of parameters for counting expenditures for students - perhaps they don't include something the NYC school district does.
I think the schools picture is bigger than liberals or conservatives, Dale. After all, everybody lives with the result.
How would you fix the schools? We all agree they are a mess, so what do we do?
But it is far more than just the schools. It's crime, infrastructure, business climate, etc. What liberal politicians seem to want more than anything else is power. They talk about their good intentions, but they never try to measure results or change policies to adjust to the reality of the situation. It's always the same old "I'm for the common worker" or "It's for the children" bunk.
Show me some results like crime going down over many years or job growth expanding due to a change in the over-burdening tax code. That's what can be shown in NYC and not in Philly, Detroit, Chicago, DC, etc.