Voters and Their “Senseless” Stories

Veggie_man says:

Whoa! What are you talking about when you say liberals enjoy those subsidies? I’m as liberal as they come and I want those subsidies thrown out immediately. Those subsidies spell miss-intended consequences all over them. When you artificially deflate a price of any item, people will exploit it, and then, when you try and take it away, too many people will have a vested interest in that product. There are three specific examples of this:

The first is High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS). We give farmers billions of dollars to grow corn every year, which deflates the price of corn. The low price of corn, coupled with the Cuban sugar-cane embargo, causes drink manufactures to move away from the more expensive, natural sugar, to the use of cheaper, High Fructose Corn Syrup to flavor their soft drinks. The use of HFCS, which is only used because of the corn subsidy, allows companies to sell soda at an artificially low price. These low prices lead to an increase in the consumption of soda which then leads public health officials to voice concern over these products (because of both the health effects of HFCS and an increase in obesity). The concern has become so loud that there have been talks of taxes on Soda, curbing the advertising of junk food on TV, and limiting the number of soda vending machines in schools. There are free market advocates who are voicing outrage that we would tax food, though they are missing the real point: How the hell are we seriously talking about taxing something that we subsidize?

The second are the subsidies that go to vegetables, making them cheap to grow. A vast majority of these vegetables grown in the US are fed to the animals that we eat. The reason this is such a big deal is because in order to raise one pound of beef, we have to feed the cow anywhere from 7 to 16 pounds of vegetables(depending on the diet of the cow). This is a huge waste. In the best case scenario, eating one pound of beef is like cooking 7 pounds of vegetables, then throwing away 6 of the 7 and eating that last pound. The issue is, if we didn’t subsidize those vegetables, the cost of meat would be far more expensive. The more expensive meat is, the less people would eat meat(or at least the poor will eat less). The less meat people eat, the more vegetables there will be, which in turn, would drive down the price of vegetables. In this situation, the price of vegetables would be far cheaper and families would feed their families for much less. In addition, the government wouldn’t have to give out so much money in food stamps and WIC. And as mentioned above, there would be massive outrange from farmers, so maybe a more modest suggestion is to only subsidize vegetables going directly to consumers.

The last, which is far too familiar with people, are the Bio-fuel subsidies. These subsidies directly on bio-fuels create a huge and artificial demand on vegetables driving the price of vegetables up. Again, this has the largest impact on poor Americans. People already know this situation pretty well, so there isn’t much of a point to go into it further.

Nevertheless, I really don’t know where you got the idea that liberals like all subsidies.

[Reply]

iunlearn Reply:
February 1st, 2010 at 9:08 pm

thanks for disagreeing. i'll bet if i have time i can come up something that you'd not want to give up if your vision of the world emerged. maybe not…but i'd imagine that i could. that's not to say "liberals are hypocrites" or anything like that. but it is to say that finding a system that does not negatively affect people is extremely difficult.

[Reply]

cityofchamps says:

So why exactly do people vote against their own interests? The article’s proposed reasoning is that people do so because they feel as if the politicians are talking down to them. I couldn’t disagree more. All I want as a registered voter is to have a politician explain the situation to me in the simplest form possible. However they fail to do this and it is up to the media to explain the situation – and provide its own spin. This is why Obama’s health care plan has backfired. Media outlets, such as Fox, its business channel, NBC, and especially CNBC, have begun bashing Obama and his health care plan. Not to mention his reckless spending of trillions of dollars to bail out corporations.

In relation to the economy, one of the article’s contributors, Mr. Western, made the following statement, "Obama's administration made a tremendous mistake by not immediately branding the economic collapse that we had just had as the Republicans' Depression, caused by the Bush administration's ideology of unregulated greed. The result is that now people blame him." The problem with this statement is that Obama DID try to blame the depression on Bush. However, it was not solely Bush’s fault our economy tanked, but primarily an 18 year run with Alan Greenspan as the Chairman of the Federal Reserve. He, not Bush, was the one who lowered interest rates and allowed lax financial regulations to allow excessive borrowing ultimately leading to the mortgage crisis.

The reason Obama has lost the support of his voters is his poor execution since he has taken office. He has made the economic crisis worse and is damaging the health of the future U.S. economy. One of Thomas Frank’s arguments is that the Republicans have learned to fake sincerity to persuade Democrats to their side. Then how come so many Republicans and Democrats have disdain for Bush???

So back to the original question. Why do people vote against their own interests? They do so because they aren’t well informed. They believe that there is a better alternative. They do so because they are persuaded by the media. People trust the media and doubt the officials they elected into office. I think people vote against their own interests because they never get a straight answer from politicians. The only place their questions are answered is through the media. The article is right on one account. Many people could benefit from the health care bill. However, there are too many questions being raised and not enough answers. Politicians need to lay out a simple plan, not a 700 page document that politicians themselves do not understand. I don’t think the American public feels that it is being spoken down to; rather people don’t trust their politicians. Thus they turn to the people who they feel do understand current issues and are trustworthy, the media.

[Reply]

Furrbaybay Reply:
February 1st, 2010 at 10:00 pm

I don't see how you can say that it is up to the media to convey information from Washington to us when we don't understand. Sure, it'd be nice if FOX, NBC, or CNN would actually give us the information we're looking for. But sadly they all have their own agendas. Obama could save three toddlers and a kitten from getting hit by a train and the media would still find reasons to fault him for it. The economy is turning around slowly, whether because of the new administration or not. It just depends on which media outlet you are watching how much you'll hear about it.

[Reply]

joeblanton18 Reply:
February 3rd, 2010 at 7:32 am

I do agree that the TV news programs have their own agendas, and that is to get rating as high as they can. That is why fox news does so good, because they are conservative in nature and cater to elderly citizens and republicans. I don't think that if I Obama saves people from being hit by a train he would be criticized. In my opinion Obama should be faulted for any bad actions he does. Look at president Bush, he could do anything wrong and be criticized for it by Keith Olberman, Jon Stewart, and at least 2 other news anchors. It's just Obama's turn to take the scrutiny that President Bush was receiving.

[Reply]

axg5068 Reply:
February 6th, 2010 at 4:03 am

City of Champs: Unfortunately, I am going to have to totally and completely disagree with you on this one. I like to consider myself an independent looking at each issue separately rather than aligning myself with some broad political camp or ideology. How dare you insult the President’s “reckless spending of billions of dollars.” If you call reckless spending the use of federal dollars to help stimulate the economy through tax-rebates, small-business incentives, and Corporate and capital gains tax-holidays, then you are right. But you are dead-wrong, because reckless spending is what the Bush administration and the Republican party has adopted as their ideals. Spending billions and billions of dollars on two wars, and costing thousands of our troops their lives abroad because of the false belief that weapons of mass destruction existed in Iraq is a reckless and idiotic move in and of itself. Not to mention that our only triumph, the capture of Saddam Hussein, probably could have been achieved through the deployment of a Delta Force special-ops team that would have essentially captured him without the use of a war. Both wars that the Bush administration has pulled our country into are reckless in that they have cost us thousands of troops, billions of dollars, and have tarnished our international image abroad as a global bully that has no regard for diplomacy other than that which follows violence, death, and destruction.

With regards to the economic downturn being the fault of a specific president, I will say that the economy has a natural business cycle if you will, and that recessions are most likely to occur at least once every 10 years, at least according to historical evidence. However, it is important to note that the de-regulation of the financial industry and the lax oversight on credit and borrowing facilities during the early-to-mid 2000s have played a crucial and essential role in the destabilization of our economy and the public’s confidence in our financial system. It is however, true that Greenspan did also keep interest rates low for too long, aiding in some of the recklessly easy borrowing policies that were extended to far too many consumers.

As for Obama’s execution, all I will say is look at what the President has proposed and the specific policies that his administration is recommending rather than listening to the right-wing media outlets such as Fox news. I prefer to watch C-SPAN or the daily news rather than these politically-charged news sources which are all providing filtered information.

I will agree with you on one point. People vote against their interests because they aren’t well-informed. Look at many Texans, for example providing unfavorable views toward a bill that would benefit them! They are paying themselves a disservice by being emotionally-tied to a political camp or more general ideology (in this case, the Republican party), instead of opening their minds and attempting to educate themselves about the specific issues at hand.

I hope that you can at least understand that even if voters aren’t well-informed, at least the current administration is doing all they can to lift us out of the worst economy since the Great Depression and bring peace and prosperity back to America. Yes, all politicians including our President are all, at the end of the day, trying to win votes, and maybe make a quick-buck for themselves, but I challenge you to look at the policies proposed by the current administration and understand how they would benefit the lower and middle-class working Americans struggling through these tough times. Thanks.

[Reply]

psunutcase Reply:
February 6th, 2010 at 4:05 am

I agree wit most of the things being said right here. The media does have their own agenda, and they don't care what they may say or do in order to get the ratings they desire. As for the bad economy, it is not the fault of Bush and Obama alone. They had Congress backing up what they believed, and even though they sign everything into law, it all has to go through Congress first. The general population isn't well informed at all. I still have no clue what the hell all of this healthcare stuff is. All I know is that I owuld have to purchase healthcare once I get off my parents plan and that it has angered and delighted a lot of people. Politicians cannot be trusted nowadays, because all they care about is the money. Why else would they continually pass laws raising their own income when that money is needed else where. Politician greed is sinking this country so fast it's not even funny, and we are the victims of it all

[Reply]

Drewbob59 says:

I completely agree with this article with the senselessness that happens in politics every day. The example specifically about how senseless stories win election and the polls, we see this everyday is just about every aspect of life. In court we like to think it is the facts and evidence that win the cases however a large part of the conviction and sentencing process is how well you can tell the story. Another example is trying to sell someone on something if you are confident and tell a good story and make it sound good people usually bite without even knowing what exactly you are selling. I feel as though this is the way our minds are constructed if it sounds good we are on board. It is sad that this is the way our country works however. People get so caught up in their social statuses and their political parties that they can’t sit back and just observe they have to be on board with their parties, can’t think on their own…
We can go on all day arguing which party is better or which one is more beneficial to the country, to us, and to the world however there is no right answer to which is better. The fact is there is good from both sides, both types of minds. Some people get so into their party just because they are a Republican and the idea is Democratic they hate it right off the bat. However if you have that same statement come from a Republican and it was a Democratic idea the Republicans would be on board. It is truly sad that people can’t think for themselves. Isn’t that what being free and being an American?
We all owe our ancestors and our country a little more respect than letting others think for us. Just because you like the way Democrats think doesn’t mean you have to vote across the board with them and listen to everything they say. Make your own decisions and vote according to YOUR ideals not someone else’s. We need to do something about this corruption going on in Washington because we waste way to many of our time, money, and resources fighting over overlying minor issues in government. If we just made things more simple and everyone can understand and no hidden legislation we, America, as a whole can better and actually turn things around quickly.
I know there is probably little to no chance that we can actually think for ourselves and make realistic decisions on our own and probably little chance that politicians will cut the little stuff and actually work on concurring major issues and making the our country and our World a better place.

[Reply]

ACL says:

When reading the BBC article I was intrigued by the part that stated … “But it is striking that the people who most dislike the whole idea of health care reform – the ones who think it is socialist, godless, a step on the road to a police state – are often the ones it seems designed to help.” I was confused about this this I started to think about it Maybe the ones who need the help are too proud to take it. Maybe they feel like they are getting hand-outs and would rather work themselves to get the health care that they feel they need. Or maybe people dislike the idea of something new. Change is a hard thing to get used to and the outcomes of these changes can be even scarier. Also, maybe these reforms are not explained in a way that most individuals can understand. Most people dislike things that they don’t understand.

[Reply]

brb5099 says:

I would disagree with what the article said, that Americans vote against their own interests "because they resent having their interests decided for them by politicians who think they know best." I think that people vote against their own interests because of the heavily divisive structure of the United States' political system. If a full-blooded republican from Texas doesn't have good health care, and could possibly get better coverage by voting for a Democrat, I believe he would not do so simply because of the stigmas associated with voting for a democrat. I think that both registered republicans and democrats have a dangerously unproductive and nonsensical notion of the other party as bad people, and themselves as good people.
So basically what I am trying to say is that I think our political system of bipartisanship is totally outdated. There are ways we could have a better, more efficient democracy, yet Washington fails to do anything because the representatives there are so cozy and afraid of change. The people in Washington who have the power to change things for the better do not do so because it is not in their interests. Just look at how ludicrous and inefficient congress is. They argue and argue about trivial things and make policies and vote based on personal agendas and not on what is in the best interest of their constituents. All that politicians care about is being re-elected, so when they are in situations where they know that there is a right and wrong, good and bad, decision, they will make the decision that will get them re-elected, even if it is clearly the bad decision. Ideologically, one would say that it is good that the representative only makes decisions based on whether it wil lget them re-elected because it is symbolic of that politicians' constituents approval, but in today's age of politics, money is a huge factor that affects the efficiency of this process. Corporations and wealthy individuals make substantial contributions to the politician of their choice, which funds the advertising campaigns of that specific candidate. That candidate will therefore skew their policy decisions more to the interests of those corporations and individuals than to ordinary voters. This is because by serving the interests of the wealthy corporations and individuals first, they will then simply get the money necessary to persuade and attract the rest of the voters, regardless if that candidates decisions were in those voters best interests or not.
Obama's recent state of the union address sickened me. To see our representatives so clearly divided between democrats and republicans is wrong because the issues at hand are not black and white issues. We need more collaboration in our government. We need our representatives to go after the issues and not be so politically minded. Maybe it is time we restructure Washington.

[Reply]

aawonc says:

The overall theme of the article, that voters are largely uneducated, is true for a large segment of the United States. Thousands, maybe even hundreds of thousands of Americans, voted for Barack Obama because he was black. A large majority of his supporters could not even identify his political platform from John McCain's. However, his race and charisma carried him to victory. In addition, his party affiliation assisted as well. Liberals are known for supporting the little man, the underprivileged man, and blacks are the most recognized minority group in the United States. It was almost unthinkable that any Democrat could vote against his party affiliation in such a monumental moment, no matter how leftist Obama's agenda was.
Obama rode the wave of momentum that he garnered through race. I knew a girl who had a Barack Obama poster in her room, and she asked me if his first or last name was Obama. I would assume that she voted for Barack if she had the poster. So why did she not know his name? This election was the epitome of wreck-less voting, as thousands turned out in order to simply be part of a monumental moment in history. I understand that Americans want to see the underdog succeed, as our country was started by the underdog, but at what cost did we do this? I will admit that I thought it would be cool to be able to say that I voted for the first black president in United States history, but I could not vote for Obama because of his platform. Barack Obama, and the fact that 2008 was a presidential election year, were the reasons for the excessive turnout of uneducated voters in 2008, however, in the majority of elections voters are somewhat educated.
Often, the country gets caught up in the uneducated because they are funny. The media exploits their lack of knowledge and draws in viewers and creates a good story. Everyone enjoys these clips, but they do not represent the voting base on a whole. In the majority of elections, voters are well educated. Presidential elections occur every four years, but there are elections for other positions every year. With the exception of voters who vote simply because they have a personal connection with a candidate, the majority of voters in annual elections are well-informed. In addition to these voters, a there is a faction of voters who take up the initiative to educate themselves on the presidential candidates every four years. Thus, there are many educated voters, and they should not be forgotten.
With that said, I want to touch on the topic of conservatives not listening to liberals. This is absolutely true that conservatives probably are not listening to liberals, and vice versa. Liberals have great ideas for a grandiose society, however, they often come with major consequences. I often say that liberals are idealistic, while conservatives are realistic. If the ideas presented by liberals could be easily implemented without consequence, everyone would be a Democrat. However, it is simply impossible. Take for example an extreme liberal idea such a communism. In theory, it is an excellent idea, and on paper it seems flawless. But, when it is implemented there are thousands of flaws. This is similar to public housing projects and raising minimum wage. Raising minimum wage is nice for those who can find or keep their jobs. However, it increases a company's cost and forces them to lay off people, creating unemployment. Republicans' ideas may not seem ideal, but that is because they are not. However, they often work well; not perfectly but well. It is due to this theory that I believe that liberals make up the majority of uneducated voters. They often just look at the facade; they do not dig deeper and see consequences. I hope that people don't think that I mean that all liberals are uneducated because some of the smartest people are liberal. I am, however, saying that the majority of uneducated voters agree with liberal ideas.

[Reply]

Romulus66 says:

I think the second to last paragraph in the news article says it all; there is no trust in politics anymore. It does not matter if the politician presents a solution to a social problem that is viable and in the best interest of voters. It has been too longer since political banter was turned into tangible, positive results. The voters have become accustomed to being lied to and have been acting accordingly; which means no drastic overhauls in policy, no increases in federal oversight or power. The public has seen time and time again that the federal government can’t handle the power they have now (Medicare being one such example) so why let them have more?
Another issue that contributes to voters being persuaded through story rather than facts is due to our education system. Our forefathers understood the importance of a public education, not to compete with other countries on math and science scores, but to build an intelligent /informed group of voters. But for anyone that went to public school, this is far from what we are actually taught. I went to a relatively affluent public school and we were only offered one semester class that was devoted the study of our government /political structure and it was optional. You will not get people to critically analyze a candidates’ argument until you teach them how to do so effectively.

[Reply]

JessLugin says:

At the end of this BBC news article it states that when politicians say,” ‘But we're doing this for you', that just makes it worse. In fact, that seems to be what makes them angriest of all,” it reminds me of when we were younger. When my parents would tell me not to do something, to eat my veggies, or “I’m just doing what is best for you,” I would do the opposite just out of spite. This kind of relates to this message from the article. People do not like to be told what to do and I can also see how they would think they are being talked to as a child.

As time goes on I feel more individuals are going to become independent voters. That is if they realize that Republicans and Democrats just bicker back and forth, in hopes that they will win an argument that does not necessarily do any good for them. The fact that they won an argument makes them satisfied. So often every single democrat in the house or senate votes one way, while the republicans vote the opposite way. A lot of time the congressmen do not think for themselves anymore, they simply do what the party tells them or would like them to do. For example before the Massachusetts election there were 60 democrats and 40 republicans in the senate. There were times when the vote would be 60 to 40 and every senator would vote along their party lines. You cannot tell me that they always agree with what they are voting for, but because they are a part of that party they do so.

In today’s world people want everything right and they want it now. Obama may have a good plan and may someday be able to make a dent in this world, but this kind of work does not happen in a short amount of time. Obama was so incredibly popular when he was elected, but now that the economy is still in shambles they have to blame someone and that someone is the president. I think this is unfair, I mean I want the economy to be good again, but no matter who is president no one is going to be able to turn it around in one year. It takes time, patience, and help from everyone.

I feel that people need to set their pride aside and focus on getting everything better for themselves and for their future families. This includes voters not being stubborn, but just voting for what is truly going to help them in the future. This also includes congressmen, they need to also stop being stubborn and work together in situations to make this economy the best it can be. Finally, President Obama needs to work with both sides and work with everyone to make this country a better place.

[Reply]

sicbeach82 says:

I do not know and do not consider myself a liberal or a conservative, and when I registered to vote, I didn’t bother checking republican or democrat. This is probably for several reasons: one, I am not educated enough on such labels. Two, I haven’t really taken the time to figure out which side I would sway towards. And three, I don’t really believe that these labels are necessary or even matter. I think they were just created to give humans another reason to argue with each other and try to prove each other wrong. I do realize that all this could be taken as me just being ignorant, which I can partially agree with, but if you really think about it: why are these labels so necessary? After all, they are just words that we gave meaning to. We all have different beliefs and are entitled to these beliefs, but why do we feel that it is necessary to put a label on all of our beliefs?

On another note, it is slightly comical, but at the same time pretty pathetic, how hypocritical some Americans are. Sam is right when he says how liberals that question the defense policies our government uses, when many of these policies consequently send thousands of troops into battle. It is funny how we think we’re trying to stick up for some of our beliefs, but at the same time we are fueling the fire that goes against some of our other beliefs as a result. We do not realize that in the process of doing all of this we are being hypocritical and concentrating so much time and effort on one belief that we are putting another belief on the back burner and not caring as much about it.

After reading the BBC article, the line that stuck out to me the most was the thought that when voters vote against their own interests, they do it because they hate having their interests decided for them by the politicians who think they know better. This line was very interesting to me because I never thought that this could be the reason why voters don’t agree with bills that would be beneficial to them. I do partially agree with this theory, but another theory makes sense to me as well. For example, as the article stated, a good portion of people in Texas do not have health care coverage; therefore, a health care bill would clearly benefit them. Perhaps the voters in Texas do not agree with a new health care policy because it is something foreign to them. Since a good percentage of them are not familiar with health care, they might for some reason think that if a law was passed to make health care mandatory for all Americans, it could somehow be bad for them, or do them more harm than good.

[Reply]

LyndsieS says:

Wow. Talk about biased. Yes, I realize that this was probably an opinion column, but seriously, could it be any more one sided? I guarantee you that if I surveyed Republicans and asked them why they were opposed to the health care reform they would have some more compelling reasons than not wanting government officials to make their decisions for them or because they are too deeply attached to the Republican party. Many Republicans probably feel the same way about liberals and wonder why in the world they can't see the "obvious" solution. As a
Republican, I really didn’t like this article and I felt like it was very condescending towards Republicans and implied that we are too stupid to understand the actual facts and make decisions for ourselves.

[Reply]

joeblanton18 says:

I am a republican, even though I did not vote in the last election. I felt that my vote would not make a difference because many people were so enamored with Obama's public speaking and propaganda. I still despise the man to this moment. I will be the first to say that I liked President George W. Bush, and I did not have a problem with him at all. Obama came into office promising gold and wealth for everyone, and that we are a strong nation that can overcome anything, and so far my family has been worse off, but when Bush was in office my family was thriving. Sad to see that Obama wins a Nobel peace prize for God knows what, then turns around and sends more troops overseas. If I remember correctly he was promising an end to the war shortly if he took office.

[Reply]

kjr198 Reply:
February 6th, 2010 at 4:38 am

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! I'm glad to see that I'm not the only Republican in this school. I completely share your beliefs. My parents are hardworking people who don't owe a dime to anyone. They have worked all their lives to pay off their mortgage and to put my sister and I through college so that we can have a strong start in the world. Yet they are being screwed over for not owing money. The hardworking Americans who have dedicated their lives to not owing people and to making sure that they are self sufficient are being screwed over by those who spent well above their means and are being forgiven for it.

[Reply]

caligirl8 says:

When it comes to voting, I totally agree that people are complete idiots. I thought we were taught to stand up for what we believe in but I guess not. I feel that people really have no idea what they are exactly voting for. I did vote for the first time this past election, but I’m a Republican and I knew what I was voting for. I believe and agree with the Republican Party and no one person was going to change that. I wasn’t going to vote for whoever my parents voted for because I am an individual and believe in my own things. People just need to learn how to make their own decisions.

[Reply]

missmeliss1189 says:

One thing, the “obvious best thing” is an opinion and varies on different levels to different individuals throughout the United States for various reasons. What may seem logical to you, may not seem logical to me. I want to paint a picture on the defense of voters and explain the facts instead of tripping around and complaining when the facts of the matter are not even being brought out and taken into consideration. A candidate tends to move towards the middle of his or her party on the “Red-Blue” scale during the primary, and then during the general election candidates tend to sway “their views” towards the center in order to attract more voters, especially the undecided voters. Politics is a career, and yes, the definition of a politician is one who is a “public servant and statesman”, they are “statesman, congressman, and legislators”. Politicians get paid, and it is their career. Their goal is to keep their constituency content and satisfied with their votes and decisions in order to get reelected because this is their JOB, and they want to keep their JOB. As well, their other goal is to rise to power within this legislative body. In addition, lobbyists and other Congressmen and women are influencing the vote of these elected officials. And at the end of the day, the overall goal of these elected officials is to: one, keep the majority of their constituents happy, two, keep their fellow Congressmen happy in order to gain power in the system in order to gain voice and fiscal funding for their district or state, and three in order to keep lobbyists happy because they donate funds to these Congressmen and womens’ campaigns. It is what it is, but before we start criticizing take this into consideration. Our political system is not meant to create a free-riding utopia. Our system is meant to create order. Remember, it is not a simple job and lawmaking is not a simple process because if it were, this would just create chaos, which would therefore instill no order. Our governmental system is a complex body, and this complex needs order and needs to have a process to lawmaking in order to get things done, but not get things done too swiftly in a haste and not too slowly that our whole system becomes useless. So before we begin criticizing American voters and why they don’t vote for their own interests, remember that many times we do not even know what we want, nor do we weigh all of the options before we go to the polls. As well, our Congressmen and women do not keep the same views and opinions for various reasons after becoming elected because, as stated previously, their goal, Democrats and Republicans alike, was to get elected. In order to get elected, appealing to the undecided, moderate voter is pertinent. Let’s analyze and use some logic before we begin criticizing one another.

[Reply]

kmr5109 says:

This isn't an issue that concerns a specific political party. This is an issue that should concern every citizen of America. Yes, we get the right to vote and choose people to make the best decisions for our country… and yes we don't always take the time to be informed when we go to make that decision. But what is the solution? No matter how well informed or politically active you may be, it is impossible to find a party (or a person for that matter) who will represent your values and beliefs. For everything wonderful and grand about the structure of our government there are also the flaws… The political agenda may not always be led with the best of intentions. You may vote for a leader who claims to feel one way about a particular issue and then act another once in office. These errors are inevitable because they are human. I just find it completely ridiculous that arguments are always so conservative or so liberal.. and it's so annoying how many people claim to be an avid member of one or the other. It is virtually impossible to completely agree with EVERYTHING a particular party stands for. Yet why do we continue to be so divided? Why do we feel so obligated to choose a side? Yes, we are all hypocrites because we vote for people or stand for things that go against who we are. If it became less about the party and the constant bantering back and forth, and more about specific issues and goals for where we want our country to head, I think we could make some real progress.
It is amazing how contradicting we (as US citizens) can be. We are proud to be free and have the right to vote, yet many choose to ignore that or simply do not care. When you have such a lack of interest from the people that the government is supposedly representing, it poses a real problem. The same kind of people (and often people from the same families) have been running our country for decades. (And that is an understatement) If the other half of the country got up and started caring about politics, we might see some real change. And we might see a government that more effectively represents the people. Will we ever get there? I highly doubt it. Sure, last election we saw a lot more voters, especially young people, which is undoubtedly a step in the right direction. But how can we get people interested in a government that is so stationary and unrepresentative of them? People are intimidated when you throw facts and statistics at them, but maybe that is exactly what they need. I don't know where the education can begin, but it would be nice to step away from the arguing back and forth and step towards a feeling of connect and unity in our country. If we felt more apart of our government and more together as a people, maybe we could really get somewhere.

[Reply]

GeeSarah says:

"It's like a French Revolution in reverse in which the workers come pouring down the street screaming more power to the aristocracy."

This quote from the article really struck me. I have thought about this issue a lot, mostly about the healthcare bill. I don’t understand why the people who seem to need health care the most are the ones who vote against it. It just doesn’t compute with me. Do these people want corporations and insurance companies to continue depriving them of care? It seems like common sense to me and a lot of others, but like the article said, it isn’t common sense.
Any issue worth caring about is one worth researching and sometimes it can be intimidating to deal with people who have obviously done more research and have more knowledge about a particular subject than ourselves. Personally, if I am talking with someone who is an expert about something and I know next to nothing about it, I am very likely to feel somewhat embarrassed and want to change the subject. People like to stick to what they know. When a politician sells us an idea in such a way that we feel like we are being talked down to, it makes us nervous. Throw in the fact that we don’t trust politicians in the first place and you’ve got the making of a very paranoid group of people.
I think it’s ironic and sad that a lot of poor people vote against healthcare reform, and other programs that would only benefit them, or at least would benefit them more than the current system. I have noticed that a lot of Penn State students here talk about how they’re “poor.” This upsets me because there’s a huge difference between being short on cash because you’re in college and actually being impoverished. It really upsets me when people talk about how they can’t buy something because they’re poor, but their parents are paying for them to go to college. Newsflash, you have no idea what it means to be poor. A lot of my friends from home are legitimately poor, and have been their whole lives—it’s not something to joke about. And ironically, a majority of them are conservatives, and they and their parents routinely vote against/voice their views against programs that would only benefit them. I think it’s like the article said: they don’t like feeling like they’re being talked down to. It’s so much less intimidating, and less demeaning, I guess, to just accept the less wordy, less patronizing explanations from Republicans.
Although I am tempted to argue that conservatives have this habit of voting against themselves more than liberals do, I know it’s not really true. I’m a liberal so of course I want to think that my party is better than the alternative (well, I do think that) but in reality, we all make the same mistakes. One of the biggest things our parties have in common is that they’re both made up of people and all people make mistakes. I think if we remembered that about ourselves instead of just our opponents, we would have a lot more empathy even with people whose views are completely opposite our own.
On an unrelated note, this video about healthcare reform pretty much sums up my views and also has Will Ferrell. Even if people can’t agree on the reforms themselves, I think we can agree that Will Ferrell is hilarious.
http://pol.moveon.org/insurance_execs/?rc=fb.6&am...

[Reply]

mtc5156 says:

I think many people vote against their own interest because they are unaware of what the politicians are really saying. Politicians obviously work on their speeches and are able to persuade people. The people therefore get confused and fall for something that they probably aren’t interested in. And yes, people do not like being talked to like their idiots and don’t understand what is going on, but truthfully many people who are voting might not understand what the politicians really are saying. I think it is up the people to be truly informed on the politicians and their ideas. The politicians can not be blamed for trying to persuade the people, it is what they have to do to win. According to this article, clearly the persuasion is working.

[Reply]

cbd5023 says:

What is really unfortunate is that we have too many vocal Americans that are stuck to far towards the liberal left or alternatively to the conservative right. Whatever happened to debate, compromise and solution? We seem to have plenty of the debate but almost none of the latter two measures.
The problem with political labels is that constituents try to live up to their mantras and are unwilling to make the effort to achieve resolution. There is too much fun in the disagreement to stop the squabble. Interestingly, most Americans occupy the broad center of American politics, but it is not these voters that tend to raise their voices in dissent, pickets or marches. Who is so pompous as to really think that Republicans are wrong all the time or that Democrats can never come up with a good idea? Watching our Congress you would think that no member of one party could possibly confer with a member from the other side of the aisle. The country is almost equally divided between the parties and the best that can be said is that our peculiar form of democracy works, amazingly despite the bickering and lack of conciliation.

[Reply]

ubuntu19 says:

Our whole country is so divided into LEFT and RIGHT. Why, now more than ever, do people feel that it is wrong to be somewhere in the middle. That is where I consider myself, stuck somewhere in the middle between left and right-center. All in all, neither left or right is fair and correct anymore. Everything is so screwed up that even if someone believes what the other is saying, they deny deny deny in order to side with their party. The truth is kept a secret from the general public and put in words that no one understands, forcing them to turn to the news. The news itself is also corrupt, siding with one party over another. Aren't they supposed to be delivering us the truth? the plain NEWS, not the opinionated news. I do think that politics should stop being so concerned with winning. I understand fighting for your side, but manipulation of the people is not what they should be focusing on.
The other thing that really gets to me is that no one seems to be pushing their own views, they just make their views seem more appealing by putting down the views of everyone else. I understand politicians pushing their views because a lot of their success is based on people support for their ideas and votes. Instead of trying to get ahead in the polls by making the other side feel like idiots, the focus should be on EXPLAINING to the people why their views are what they are and let them decide what they want. I know that this is unrealistic because politics have become so insanely bias and almost what could be considered corrupt.
What we are doing now is not working. Everyone is skeptical about the politics and policies of our own country. The fact that we are forced to chose one party over another and there are only two choices makes everything even harder. In other countries (S. Africa for example) they have multiple parties, they all overlap in certain aspects and so the people have a better choice-now there the politics are screwed up for other reasons, but this part works. Voting feels to be like choosing the lesser of two evils, that is not how anyone wants to pick to rules their country and decides the policies they have to live by. I want to vote for someone I am passionate about because I agree with what they are saying.
In the end it all comes down to the fact that as frustrating and annoying as it is we are stuck here. No one that wants to change politics will ever get anywhere. Most of the best people in the world aren't interested in politics, what does that say about us? The best and most loyal and amazing people in our country, the smartest also, don't want to rule our country because that is how bad our political system is right now. I think a lot of this coming out is pure frustration, and in a year or two I may be singing a different tune, but for now I would like to see some changes.

[Reply]

jml5261 says:

Personally I have no real interest in politics. I find it hard to listen to politicians because I do not know when I am being lied to. I think the BBC article makes a good point that it is very hard to change people’s minds. I think that republican’s always believe what the republican politicians have to say because they are republican, and vice-versa. It is hard to convince republicans to believe in a health care bill when the politicians they listen to are telling them that it is a disaster. The article also mentions stories vs. stats, and if I were interested in politics my loyalty would be with the stats. I do not think it is condescending to explain a political issue and use statistics, but rather it is condescending to tell an embellished story with no substance and expect people to accept it blindly.

[Reply]

kmp5031 Reply:
February 5th, 2010 at 12:15 am

I agree with you completely. I don't have any real interest in politics and, perhaps, it's for this reason. I know that when I turned 18 and had to fill out my voter registration, I did not want to be affiliated with either party. To be completely honest, there are things that I disagree with with Republicans and things that I disagree with with Democrats. I think that it is the tendency of political parties to stick with each other even if it is hurting them in some way. I think you're right when you say that it isn't "condescending to explain a political issue and use statistics but rater it is condescending to tell an embellished story with no substance and expect people to accept it blindly."

[Reply]

wdo5002 says:

I agree with the BBC article, people often resent that someone else may know what is best for them. I find this especially prevalent in some of the most complex issues facing our country. I recently heard President Obama discussing the opposition to the financial stimulus package. He said (I’m paraphrasing here) that when asked whether they supported specific initiatives in the stimulus package an overwhelming majority did, but when asked whether they supported the package as a whole less than 50% did. Federal government is a complicated enterprise; I consider myself pretty well informed and I admit I still don’t understand all of the intricacies of our government.
People always like to think that they know best, especially in regards to their own welfare. People like to think that professionals who spend years of their lives understanding the subtleties of economic systems know no better than they do. I’m puzzled by the fact that people commonly acquiesce to the others’ expertise in regards to medical decisions, for example, but refuse to do so when it comes to national legislation. If a doctor told me that he advised surgery, I might ask for his/her rationale but ultimately I realize that the doctor knows what’s good for me better than I do.
Also, I think this country has ideological lines set in stone to the point that they will turn a blind eye to their own needs just to support the party they’ve always supported. We tend to take a few rather easily defined issues and, whether they are likely to change or not, use them to choose a political party whose beliefs we defend dogmatically. Many conservatives will withhold support of economic bills that may benefit them because they won’t support democrats who they fear will snatch their guns and encourage abortions. Many liberals will support extending government aid to people other than themselves to prove that they are equal opportunity. I think the two party system makes it too easy for people to choose their positions based on a single issue. One of the biggest problems in the US is the inability for one political party to compromise with the other and make true progress. With more viable parties to support, we might find that people are no longer forced to support one party based on a single personally important issue. If the population split its loyalty even among three political parties compromise would be forced in the face of zero progress; when one side has the majority the temptation to rule based on plain majority is too tempting. Instead we are forced to support one of two parties of throw our votes away. If we decide that we will vote upon a single important issue we risk essentially voting for host of policies that plainly go contrary to our interests simply by virtue of supporting one policy that we believe in.

[Reply]

pigsandsteers says:

Farming was once the chief way of life in nearly every country. People cannot live without food, and nearly all their food comes from crops and animals raised on farms. Many other materials such as cotton and wool also come from plants and animals raised on farms. Not many people farm for a living any more, but farming remains the most important occupation in the world.
Prior to the twentieth century, the typical American family lived on a small farm. They raised hogs, cattle, sheep, chickens, and planted corn, fruits, garden vegetables, hay, and wheat. Everyone worked long and hard, but the results were often meager. Families barely harvested enough food for themselves. This situation began to change during the last half of the 1800's and it changed remarkably in the next century.
Scientific methods and labor-saving machinery have made farming increasingly productive. The development of improved plant varieties and fertilizers has helped double and even triple the yields of some major crops. Scientific livestock care and breeding have helped increase the amount of meat and products that animals produce. At the same time, the use of tractors and other modern farm equipment has sharply reduced the need for farm labor.
As farming has become less important as a way of life in the United States, it has become more important as a business enterprise. Today's successful farmers are expert not just in agriculture but also proficient in accounting, marketing, and finance. Farms that are not run in a businesslike fashion have great difficulty surviving.
Without those government subsidies that Sam so blatantly bashed, the chief way of life is gone in our country and we become totally dependent on imported food. That is all fine and dandy except what happens if our loving importers have a beef with us and poisons our food or cuts off the supply. We will be left all alone without any food because we have been lazy enough to let the work of raising food to slip out of our fingers and to be controlled by a potential enemy.
The commodities market by itself will never guarantee farmers a price that will cover their costs, because it cannot correct itself in the ways other market sectors can. Deregulating this market further—which is what eliminating subsidies would entail—will not and cannot defend the existence of small- to medium-sized family farms, either in the US or abroad. Small family farms are the backbone of a community, a nation, and of society as a whole. A landscape of family farms is settled, balanced and stable, and generally sustainable. It's the natural shape of society on the land. Such communities aggregate into strong and secure nations

[Reply]

gonewiththewnd says:

I think that US’s severe division of political interests into mainly two very different groups has had profoundly negative effects on our culture. We divide our selves and only notice how different we are. We are all guilty of this… myself included but we don’t like o talk about it. That’s another thing about US culture that I don’t like… we don’t talk about that tough stuff. All the way from Politics in Washington to parents raising a family, we have a tendency as a cultural group to just sweep out “dirt” under the rug. This issue ranges in so many ways from parents not talking to their children about drugs and sex because its “awkward” to the retired president not being able to admit that this stupid war we have been in is a huge waste of money that has much better uses.
In reference to people not realizing how their every day actions affect the world is a fundamental issue that people need to address. We don’t even realize how products we use run off and pollute a pond with poison that kills all of the creatures that naturally belong there. Human beings since out creation have been dominating and killing other species with out regard to the global effects our actions have. Not only do we kill other species but kill our own as well. I once heard in my biology class that one of the aspects that set human beings apart from all other species is not just our large brain size, but also the fact that we have the ability to kill for means other than survival. Aka we are the only species to murder with intent to harm not for food. To me, this doesn’t make us great. This makes us horrible. The fact that a human being can intentionally kill another still rocks my world… it seems incomprehendable to me. I’m sure many people would agree with me and yet we don’t even realize we support ruthless killing everyday. We buy at Wal-Mart and support a store that puts the mom and pop shop out of business. We just impoverished someone by buying at Wal-Mart! The reality is America we are fucking Wal-Mart. We dominated and sell low around the world. We eliminate the need for hand made culturally representative things because we can just buy them in plastic from Wal-Mart instead! We need to realize how our every day actions support the homogenization and monopolization of the globe. Pretty soon we are all going to be wearing the same clothes eating the same food and believing the same things and it will be no ones fault but our own.

[Reply]

arw5141 says:

I'm really glad that this was brought up in the first place. But it's also one of those topics where you talk in circles because unless every single person comes to the same realization, nothing is going to change. Sam pointed out in class that people of African American descent own cell phones with parts made by slaves. The same holds true for all the protests and activists. They're all hypocrites. We're all hypocrites. It's really amusing when people are actively vocal about something and don't hold to their own. Practice what you preach. It would be nearly impossible though. The economy of the world would collapse. People don't know how to exist without money. Unless you went back in time and hit the guy who decided that trading one thing for something else was a good idea, it just won't happen. The human psyche disturbs and scares me a little bit. Even when I argue with my economists friends about the structure of societies, they have a hard time finding an argument for "just get rid of money". Who wants to give up their pretty green pieces of paper and their shiny toys? Didn't think so. I'll also admit that I wouldn't be willing to, unless the whole world decided they were doing it together. How do those guys who give up all worldly possessions do it? Do they end up getting paid to talk at audiences and end up back at square one?

[Reply]

daw291 says:

There is no doubt in my mind that voters are educated and well informed of the leaders they are voting on and the policies these leaders are looking to enforce. However, I agree with the BBC article, although it may be a little biased about the United Kingdom's health care system, that Americans may be feeding into a 1960's "paranoid style" of thinking. It is not very often our nation brings about major health care reform, especially on a such a large scale as such as President Obama is trying to implement. It is my belief that the reason why many Americans are voting against their own interest is because they are scared of what the outcome of the legislation may be directly on themselves, individually.

[Reply]

shamrock87 says:

I think that we should take our right to vote, because we fought for the right and I don’t think that people shouldn’t vote if people are old enough because we were given these rights and especially women. I think that people should take every chance they get to vote. We were given rights that people long ago didn’t have and I think that regardless if you a liberal or conservative you should take your right and have a say in what you think. I think that people should be able to come to an agreement at one point eventually and you will think that both sides have good points to make and you could chose one or be neutral.

[Reply]