Michael Hardner Posted November 2, 2004 Report Share Posted November 2, 2004 Although the media is portraying the election strife we're seeing today as a reaction to the events of 2000, I'm not so sure. For some reason, American voters are very angry about what's going on right now. It's just just the war, or the economy, either. It seems to proceed from a deeply held image that people have of their country. Voters are seeing that image tarnished and are blaming the "other" political side. No matter who wins the election today, there will be a hangover of suspicion, and even more distrust of public institutions. I hope I"m wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slavik44 Posted November 2, 2004 Report Share Posted November 2, 2004 Although the media is portraying the election strife we're seeing today as a reaction to the events of 2000, I'm not so sure.For some reason, American voters are very angry about what's going on right now. It's just just the war, or the economy, either. It seems to proceed from a deeply held image that people have of their country. Voters are seeing that image tarnished and are blaming the "other" political side. No matter who wins the election today, there will be a hangover of suspicion, and even more distrust of public institutions. I hope I"m wrong. But I tend to doubt you will be.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maplesyrup Posted November 2, 2004 Report Share Posted November 2, 2004 Although the media is portraying the election strife we're seeing today as a reaction to the events of 2000, I'm not so sure.For some reason, American voters are very angry about what's going on right now. It's just just the war, or the economy, either. It seems to proceed from a deeply held image that people have of their country. Voters are seeing that image tarnished and are blaming the "other" political side. No matter who wins the election today, there will be a hangover of suspicion, and even more distrust of public institutions. I hope I"m wrong. But I tend to doubt you will be.... Slavik44....is this more of your brilliant analysis? Michael....do you think this is being engineered to discredit our public institutions? I do . 40 years ago public was a good word - now if you listen to CanWest Global, Gordon Gibson, and Alberta, it is a dirty word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Terrible Sweal Posted November 2, 2004 Report Share Posted November 2, 2004 Well, the Bush deficit clearly plays perfectly into the hands of a political agenda that would seek to cripple the capability of federal public institutions in the US to address citizens' needs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 2, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 2, 2004 I think that there's something to that, but I also think that in many cases public institutions deserve the criticism. But much of the reason for their ineptitude is traced to politics also, IMO. Those governments who take 'pot shots' at institutions shouldn't be surprised, though, when other institutions suffer as well. In other words, what's good for the Federal Dept. of Goose, is good for the Federal Department of Gander. Or something like that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Terrible Sweal Posted November 2, 2004 Report Share Posted November 2, 2004 Exactly. The ideological disdain for government exhibited by some people is often internally inconsistent ... police yes, regulators no; yes to armies, no to diplomats. For some it seems to boil down to mere whimsy as to what is proper government and what is too much. Why protection against pickpockets is seen to be more valid than protection against financial misrepresentation or poisoning a watershed is unclear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slavik44 Posted November 3, 2004 Report Share Posted November 3, 2004 Although the media is portraying the election strife we're seeing today as a reaction to the events of 2000, I'm not so sure.For some reason, American voters are very angry about what's going on right now. It's just just the war, or the economy, either. It seems to proceed from a deeply held image that people have of their country. Voters are seeing that image tarnished and are blaming the "other" political side. No matter who wins the election today, there will be a hangover of suspicion, and even more distrust of public institutions. I hope I"m wrong. But I tend to doubt you will be.... Slavik44....is this more of your brilliant analysis? Michael....do you think this is being engineered to discredit our public institutions? I do . 40 years ago public was a good word - now if you listen to CanWest Global, Gordon Gibson, and Alberta, it is a dirty word. I never claim to give brilliant analysis, but from what I look at I would tend to agree that there will be a hangover of suspicion in America even after the election. Before the election even started there were already lawsuits filed, that idicates to me there will a political hangover of mistrust between parties. Besides that look around you ask soemone on the street, there is a disconnection between the people and their politicians creating a distrust of public institutions. So yes I would tend to agree with what was stated above. Do you ahve a problem with me giving my opinions on a web discussion board about politics? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maplesyrup Posted November 3, 2004 Report Share Posted November 3, 2004 Cry me a river! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slavik44 Posted November 3, 2004 Report Share Posted November 3, 2004 Cry me a river! glad to see you can keep on topic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted November 3, 2004 Report Share Posted November 3, 2004 Cry me a river!I'm glad to see you back, Maple Syrup.I disagree often with you. But I will defend your right to be here in the future. (Blame me for not defending you more.) This American election is interesting around the world. (I know because I have spoken to Russians, for example.) I enjoyed more our Canadian June election: -Birds in a bush, kerry the birds? Noisy but boring. ----- -Harper vs. PM PM? Genuine, interesting but boring, complicated. For example. I believe in French Canada and its way to do things. Much more interesting. More significant. The Yanks make a big noisy deal. The Europeans (and Lebanese/Israelis) too - big noisy deal. But we Canadians have the real goods and no one notices. Les Québécois are democratic, honest. Go figure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.