Here it is, the base of the Democratic party.
Everything is based on emotion.
Obama made me cry, he makes me feel good, I like him, I want to vote in the first black President.
Nothing to do with actual issues, actual stances.
I have to believe that once people actually hear Obama's stances they are going to have to question his ability to lead.
But even that said, elections are decided by the "independents" or "people who have no belief system and don't think very much about what happens around them"
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
Hillary says tears were turning point
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
7 comments:
'Fear' is an emotion too. It's something republicans have used very well...especially when it comes to justifying war! So, don't just pick on dems here. It's the world of politics and that's how it works. You exploit people and their emotions. There are no angels out there!
are you defining "independents" as:
"people who have no belief system and don't think very much about what happens around them"?
the problem is, of course, that hillary never really actually cried
American,
It’s almost as if you tacitly approve of exploiting people’s emotions, in the name of politics.
There’s nothing wrong with Game or anyone else pointing out emotional manipulation, in the hopes that the more aware people are, the more often they'll use their head.
As to your Republicans using fear charge; I believe your comparison is lacking.
Yes Liberals claimed the Repub’s “used” fear either by overstating the danger or making it up altogether.
But many, including experts, believe there is a very real danger, many more believe if we don’t reduce the danger now, it will continue to grow until it will be extremely difficult, if not almost impossible to protect our citizens.
If one believes that we are possibly in danger, then you are not necessarily manipulating emotions, but are merely attempting to awaken skeptics to realities.
On the other hand, with the Hillary Clinton episode she was either:
A) Attempting to manipulate the weak minded (there’s nothing that will start a liberals knee-a-jerking faster than a tearful women). Or-
B) It was real and she is too weak or unstable to be the leader of the free world.
Not because of the fact she was crying or almost crying, but because of what she was crying about in public – the stress and strain of the campaign.
(If you believe as I do, she was cracking up over the pure stress, frustration and unfairness of it all, after all, it’s her destiny, her birthright, to become the Dem nominee don’t ya know!)
Blamin's right on the money again.
Hillary's tears were for herself and her poll numbers. That her tears, no matter what they were for, elicited support shows that the notion regarding the left being motivated by emotion is true.
Here's what I fear: that if we're not careful, a schmuck like Obama, who believes some babies who have exited the womb are not persons, might be elected. This fear is a legitimate one, just as the fear of more terrorist activity on our soil is legitimate.
Marshall Art,
I've often asked myself which would be the better of the two evils that are HiC and Obama.
Obama is so inexperienced, so lacking in depth, that he would truly be a "puppet-on-a-string" president. Good for giving rousing speeches (to the easily impressed) and that’s about it.
Hillary on the other hand knows exactly how much she would like for government to control our lives.
Knowing that, unfortunately, our presidential election seems to be first and foremost a popularity contest, a decidedly shallow popularity contest, I’m tempted to support the candidate that I feel has the best chance to beat either one of the Gruesome Twosome.
Blamin,
As both are students of Alinsky, they are more than two sides of the same coin, they ARE the same coin, just that Hill is the discolored, old version one finds on the street, and Barry Obama is the shiny, newer minting. But both the cheap denomination having little value.
Many think in terms of "best chance to win". Seems to me that any candidate has a chance that has the votes. My choice is between Thompson and Hunter as I dig deeper, a ticket combining the two would be best for the country based on their platforms. Bottom line is I support the party's nominee when the dust clears and I'll do my best to fire up as many as possible to do the same. Stress what the right is for against what the left is for and we win every time.
Post a Comment