NCCUknow
All American
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2012
- Messages
- 2,502
deepdarkblue said:dukeberto said:deepdarkblue said:On election day, If it's crystal clear that Trump will lose, I'll probably just vote for Gary Johnson. If it's looking close, I'll vote for Hillary as anti-Trump insurance.
This is where I'm at right now. What makes this even more incredibly frustrating is that these are my first ever presidential elections that I will actually get to vote in - what amazing choices.
After your fourth or fifth Presidential election, you just sort of sigh and accept it. You know it's not right and you know there must be much better people for the job, but they aren't options. You start to wonder if maybe a random lottery might not be equally effective.
I honestly believe that the American presidential election process is designed to make candidates we find admirable and acceptable look like disappointing options. It's just a process of character attrition. I'm certainly susceptible to this. Hillary Clinton really grates me and I often find myself thinking, "man, she seems like a fucking corrupt insider that is not likable."
Then I step back and think, holy fuck, she is the most qualified presidential candidate in over a century (maybe ever), and is a centrist with colleagues on both sides of the aisle that have historically considered her imminently competent and motivated to solve problems she is confronted with for the good of the Country. More significantly, she has literally spent her entire life in service of the public.
There are these two stories of Hillary Clinton and the truth is probably somewhere in between. Campaign cycles just present the public with the worst story for a candidate and ask the public to decide how much they believe that story. It certainly can be frustrating. The result is that politicians with shorter track records of public service have a serious advantage. This isn't a good thing in my opinion. However, an advantage is that fucking crazy people get fully vetted eventually and can't just waltz into the White House with a few convincing months of PR savvy.
I'm just rambling now, but I think what I am trying to say is that no "preferable" candidates truly stay preferable to a large swath of America through the presidential election grinder. Also, it makes me so angry that being a public servant for any period of time is counted as a demerit in public elections. This country should celebrate public service, not demean it is a pathway to cronyism and insider dealing. I think that widespread sentiment, in itself, drives away a lot of intelligent qualified individuals who might serve.