Seattlest: Weekly Writer Concerned for Simple-Minded Obama Voters

artstain

Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:47:24 -0800

I've experienced a lot of this over Obama in this election. It upsets people that he can inspire others to vote simply because he is likeable, charming, not your average politician, etc., and the naysayers get a rise out of calling those people out on it. A friend of mine was criticizing Obama's tax plan and I asked her if she could tell me what tax policies are like currently, and she couldn't. She is a McCain supporter and couldn't even tell me McCain's tax policies either.

TroyJMorris

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 19:57:56 -0800

And folks could answer the last three. And Paul supporters could too. It's a valid point, horribly executed by a sub-par writer attempting to be a political expert. Sound Politics isn't a site known for cultivation of superior analysis.

Euromutt

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 18:11:20 -0800

Okay, let's be fair. Let's take "The Question for Obama Supporters," replace Obama's name with that of any other presidential candidate in the present cycle, and pose that question to people who supported that person in the primaries. Quick, name one actual accomplishment while in office of Mike Huckabee! Mitt Romney? Ron Paul? Hillary Clinton? John Edwards? Bill Richardson? (Okay, I can answer that last one, but then, I am a Richardson supporter.) Note that I say "while n office" because getting elected into office doesn't count, since Obama managed that too. Next question is whether the accomplishment or bill in question is one that you wanted. I can name two bills Ron Paul's introduced in the House, and they're both reasons why I wouldn't piss on him if he were on fire, much less vote for him. I don't think "sponsored a bill I opposed" is a better reason to vote for someone than "didn't sponsor any bills I was aware of."

Jeremy M. Barker

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:56:00 -0800

BigGreenFrank--You're point is not entirely valid. Yes, image has a lot to do with how elections are won, but there's not exactly a huge difference between image and substance. Kerry and Gore lost because their substantial qualifications were idiotically plaid down by bad advisers. They didn't run on core issues, they ran on a platform foolishly designed to try to appeal to moderates. Kerry didn't exactly run against the war, now did he? In that sense, the election was a perfect referendum on their platforms: Kerry got rebuked for having the lesser platform. As for Kennedy, you seem to underestimate his presidency. He put a man on the moon, helped the Civil Rights movement, managed not to start a nuclear war, and laid the groundwork for the Great Society programs carried out by LBJ. How that's that an insubstantial presidency in your eyes is beyond me.

BigGreenFrank

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 16:28:28 -0800

You really don't think that more than a few people are voting for Obama because he's "likable" or has a rockstar persona? You're really not even gonna consider that? Right or wrong, Presidents win because they connect with the populous. That's why Clinton could win and Al Gore couldn't. That's why Kerry couldn't win against a President with a 30% approval rating. That's why Kennedy is still beloved even though he brought us closer to nuclear war than anyone before him, and really didn't do alot to advance America. Good for you if you vote based on "the issues", but let's be clear, presidential election are not won on the basis of superior tax programs and enlightened health care reform (which all end up looking the same in the end...) More than a couple of your fellow voters ARE voting for Obama for less grandiose reasons that your own, you don't have to happy about it, but don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

TroyJMorris

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 15:19:29 -0800

Ironically, In honor of events slightly more momentous than the leak of a new Killers song, Stereogum's signing off for the rest of the day and urging you to take this time to make sure you vote. Also, Joe the Plummer has a PR firm now.

TroyJMorris

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 15:05:38 -0800

What more experience? He's been on how many world tours? He's also fully apologized to Fall Out Boy and The Bravery. That shows class. He also has an appropriate fear of the number 623.

admiralzing

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 14:42:36 -0800

Somebody told me that Mr. Flowers may need some more experience, I wrote him in for Lieutenant Governor.

TroyJMorris

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 14:31:38 -0800

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3249/3004031224_df7a1e8fa0_o.jpg

TroyJMorris

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 14:23:51 -0800

Matt, it's called a write-in vote. Way to lose the election for all us "Flowers."

admiralzing

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 14:16:04 -0800

He's right, I only voted for Obama because the lead singer of The Killers declined to run this election cycle, and Obama's policies reminded me of the sweet synth-rock grooves of my favorite mormon rock band. I can't believe the Weekly unearthed the truth! The Killers Rule! Whoo!

TroyJMorris

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 14:12:35 -0800

Oh man. I just had an opportunity to read it. I now know what "dribble" means. God awful, simple-minded, fecal splattering of writing.

TroyJMorris

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 14:00:47 -0800

Let's not forget why I jumped on the O-Train: It's who he surrounds himself with and his acceptance that he is only as strong as his support (fans?): that'd be us.