Back in 2006 during our interim election cycle, I wrote a piece on ABS, the "Anybody But" syndrome. The idea is simple. "We don't want him (or her), so we'll vote for the other person." It's not that they're voting for someone they like as much as they're voting against someone they don't like.
It was the mode back in 2004 when people voted for John Kerry. He wasn't offering anything anyone wanted; he just wasn't George Bush. It was the mode in 2006. It wasn't that Democrats were offering positions people wanted; they just weren't George Bush Republicans. Oddly, it appears to be the standard mode in this presidential election, too, except it has spread.
I don't see a whole lot of excitement among Republicans for "their candidate" -- John McCain. They're not against him by any means, but, let's face it ... he's just not that exciting. He's not charismatic. He's not offering grand promises that really stir us up. He's not particularly innovative. So why is it that McCain is doing so well in the polls? Well, you'll hear it all over the place. "If you don't vote for McCain, you are voting for Obama!" Pragmatism, pure and simple. You see, we don't want Obama in there. Vote for ... whoever isn't Obama. And the "anybody but" syndrome comes home to roost among Republicans.
Of course, I see the same thing going on among Democrats. One key strategy to fight off McCain (versus electing Obama) is to portray him as a George W. Bush look-a-like. They call him "McSame" and run ads telling us that there is no difference between the two. It's not that Obama is offering us great things. We just don't want more George Bush. The fact that the man isn't running is irrelevant. If you can tie a candidate to Mr. Bush, you can defeat that candidate because Democrats want to be sure vote for anybody but George Bush. Sure, there are some Obama fans out there, but the majority of folks that are going to vote for him, it seems, are people who just don't want John McCain to win. You will certainly hear the same thing from that side: "If you don't vote for Obama, you are voting for McCain!" And that side continues their "anybody but" syndrome.
Is that the best America has to offer? Is it that we are so splintered that we can't find someone for people to be excited about? Or is it that we just don't have anyone in politics anymore that stirs us? Maybe we're just too jaded on politics entirely? I don't know, but I am not particularly interested in casting my vote for "the lesser of two evils", as if that's good for me, my family, my friends, or my country. I'll have to think this out more carefully ...
6 comments:
This Us vs. Them mentality is what drives the two-party system. I am perplexed that no major third party has emerged since the two parties stopped addressing the question of fiscal sanity. One side talks of cutting taxes and the other raising them on "the rich". However, aside from some lip protests from McCain, both sides seem content to continue growing the budget, which means both sides are for more taxes. Spending is what determines tax liability, not whether you temporarily cut or raise them.
The problem this time around is that the "us" that we're favoring over the "them" hardly seems to be any better than "them". You would think we could float one candidate who would appeal to people like me.
Personally, I think it's time for the two-party system to go. Of course, no one is asking me, so it's not likely to happen. "The Great and Powerful Stan has spoken ..." "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain."
Have you checked out:
http://www.constitutionparty.com/
??
Why, yes, I have. (Unfortunately, they're not on the ballot here in Arizona.)
So what if someone chooses NOT to vote for either canidiate? LouAnn
You have a choice at that point. Do you want to keep a clear conscience even if it means a worse candidate than the "lesser evil" gets in, or do you feel that letting in the worse candidate is worse than not voting at all?
(I ask the question because I haven't decided yet.)
Post a Comment