With just 8 days to go until what's being billed as one of the most critical elections in our history (at least until the next one, that is) I've been pondering what I want my life to be about. It sounds a little deep, compared to the choice at hand, but i believe the fundamental tone of my Zen and that of our country and our planet may not be that far from a single goal.
Let's face it, about 50% of you don't like the proposals brought forth by one of the candidates. Without shock to anyone, the other 50% don't like the proposals brought out by the other candidate. The underlying narrative in any competition which seems to prevalent is bonding with one of the choices and deconstructing the other choices. For the record, this debate applies fairly evenly to such favorites as "Coke v. Pepsi," "Cable v. DSL" and "Ford v. GM." The thing you'll notice in common about the 3 examples cited, and many others that I'm sure you can name, is that it's a branding debate - you choose a product based on how it was marketed to you and stick with it almost without change.
This paradigm has extended into the presidential race with one amplifying factor. It seems that there's something in human nature that causes us to defend our choices when challenged. I don't know if that's a matter of pride, survival or something else that i don't have the degree to understand, but i do know it's a factor. The basis of these campaigns should be rooted in why A is better than B. Unfortunately, in politics more so than other arenas, the debate turns to why B is worse than A. In my humble opinion, this not so subtle difference does not have the effect the campaigns desire. I don't believe that it moves as many people to their side as it does cement people into their position because they spend so much time defending their choice.
Both parties are equally guilty of that game. They're both also equally guilty of having policies which are not a panacea. Both sides fix some problems while creating others. True resolution of these issues will not be brought forth until accountability returns and the center is de-vilified and solidified.
Since i don't believe that problem will be fixed quickly, i have to examine what will be the deciding factor in my choice. That factor is the outlook i want to have on life and i want my country to have on life. During the second greatest economic turmoil in the history of our country the phrase 'The only thing we have to fear is fear itself" rang out as a beacon of hope in a bleak time. When i look at the events of recent history, the feeling that i hold in my head is that we've been coached that we need to be on constant watch, fearful of an unknown terror that may surface at any time. Please let me say that I am in no way diminishing the possibility of such events, I'm simply saying that in times of crises, be they economic or military, a leader needs to inspire hope that the crisis will be averted or handled.
You can argue that either man has or doesn't have the requisite experience or disposition to deal with such crises. I remind you that the president is one man surrounded by advisers who should be experts in their field to help him make the decisions required. In the case of one candidate, the assertion that his advisers will give him good counsel when needed is such a cornerstone of his appeal that a well crafted campaign would work hard to discredit associations from the past simply to chip away at that stone. Their candidate has a more refreshing taste and the other has too many calories. In the case of the other candidate, discussion of voting alignments and temper could be used at a means to redefine his experience. That candidate may have a cheaper monthly fee, but his download speeds can't possibly rival his opponents.
Haven't we been marketed enough? Shouldn't you just stop watching the ads and evaluate the data at hand? So please, when you close the curtain, consider attitude, judgement and experience, pull the lever, and pray.
Sincerely,
Joe the blogger.
Comments