|
I bet this has been discussed a lot here, but I haven't read about it. I haven't read many of the debates over candidates. I haven't placed a lot of importance on who will be president because I'm more concerned about neo-facsicm and injustice, not just the figurehead of an administration.
Anyway, since I will most likely vote for whichever democrat is posed against Bush in 2004, it is of some interest to me, of course...
So, something I've been thinking about off and on is, I notice people tending to avoid the more 'left' candidates because they think they won't win. Doesn't it make sense to promote whomever is closest to what you believe, not just who you think will win? I was thinking that when it's time to vote (and only then) would it make sense to comprimise by voting for the person you think will win.
Another thing, I read and hear people debating about how left, right or center people should be to get public approval for a candidate. My guess is that people do notice insincerity when it's extreme. All of the candidates that I see on TV are obviously salesmen. The least offensive seem to be Kucinich and Sharpton (coincidentally the people that seem closest to reflecting my politics). So, a good strategy for a candidate might be to not be a fraud. Promote what you believe, not what you think will snag the vote..., just a thought.
|