Science shows that when we are deciding which candidate to support, anxiety, enthusiasm and whom we identify with count more than reason or logic.
Comment: Senator Obama is real, not like the Clintons still playing the old politic system. Senator Obama must close the race real soon, so he can prepare for McCain in Nov. Hilary have to go, she keep manipulating the blue colar voters like she meant what she promised?
I use to like the Clintons, lately their making me sick.
Comment: Excellent article. Frightening. How vulnerable we are to a demogue who knows how to push our emotional buttons of fear and anxiety. I saw it happen with President Bush's second term race. He played the fear card so well. I can see that Sen. Clinton is very adept with Bill's coaching at pitching the right emotions to pull voters to her side.
Comment: IT MAKES ME SICK TO THINK IF OBAMA WIN THIS ELECTION... I WILL VOTE FOR McCAIN...
Comment: There is not any science here. It is called propaganda exploited by the media. At times I thought the media must be in Obama's bed at night, and he must be really good. The media has brought us GW Bush twice without telling us all the facts , a war without telling us all the facts, and now Obama. Corporate media elects the president. I heard some pudents and newsreports discount truths that were important. This is just another media propaganda stunt, fact entities need to take responsibility for their behavior. Journalists read their script, bottom line. The job of a journalist is to find the truth and tell us the facts, not goosh and act stupid over someone. It is Duming down the population, we do not live in a democracy anyway. It is a global corporate world run by corporations, and we are run by corporations. Hope - that the the American people get a brain.
Comment: Many of these comments seem to believe that if print media spent more time describing candidates positions, the public would be better informed. Since few voters are print readers, I have my doubts as to the veracity of this belief.
On the other hand, many voters do watch the debates where little of substance is put before the candidates.
I have seen the FISA amendments, including telecom amnesty mentioned once. I have never seen a question about how the candidates plan to reduce the national debt, repair the nation's infrastructure, deal with Bush's power grab, investigate the crimes committed by the Bush Administration, or a host of other national issues that voters would be interested in if they knew or thought about them.
Comment: Comment: One month into the Presidential election year, leading candidates have yet to address issues of urgent importance for every day life for Americans.
Health insurance industry, agribusiness giants, corporate criminals, nuclear power, energy providers pollution controls, big oil, big banks, drug companies, union busters, war profiteers, credit card companies, corporate Democrats in Congress and Corporate Republicans in Congress.
This list of issues has been ignored by the so called leading candidates for President of the United States. The private cable networks, who now sponsor Presidential debates, have worked overtime to exclude questions on these issues, not to mention the candidates and the civic groups supporting these issues.
What issues are the leading candidates now supposed to speak on while they wait out the American electorate until the Democrat???s and Republican Party???s convention?
The message is that the natives are restless. The leading candidates do not represent whom they claim to represent, if they did, issues would be on the table for discussion during Presidential debates.
Comment: mfiller-- I agree. And, I'd add that people used to be quite capable of understanding and voting according to positions. There was a time when journalists were expected to provide precisely the information you argue for. Perhaps the problem isn't the dumbing down of the electorate, but a dumbing down of the journalists?
I know that at a leading j-school here, when I was studying poli sci & economics, journalism students were taught all about the technical aspects (e.g. splicing video), but were required to take very few courses in the subjects on which they'd be reporting (history, economics, political science, biology, computer science, etc). Those who were students back then are senior writers now...
The problem, in my mind, with mainstream media's abrogation of it's responsibility to present and compare political platforms is that people now have to hunt for it. Some lack the skills to do it, or the passion to spend all the time necessary. And others may be misdirected into believing false claims or extreme partisanship.
Comment: NON-SEQUITER!!! That is what I said out loud as I started the second paragraph of this article. People's "cognitive-processing limitations" are not the reason they cannot learn about candidates's positions - it is their over-reliance on a national media (including Newsweek) that scrupulously avoids covering them. Where was the "Positions" issue of Newsweek? CSPAN is the only network where one can even see a stump speech - when Hillary tried to substitute a stump speech for one of her concessions, the networks all cut away within 2 minutes. Aparently, they expect issues to be communicated to their viewers in 30-second ads or not at all!
You say "voter are not computers, willing and able to remember and analyze candiates every postion" - why is it that jornalist's computers are able to catalog and report results ahead of the Secretaries of State, but not willing to catalog candidates' positions. To compare and contrast the current positoins, one must navigate the candidates' web sites and perform a cataloging that is indeed a lot of work, and difficult for ordinary people. It should, however, be mandatory for some journalist on each newspaper, magazine, and TV network to do so. WHERE ARE THEY?
Even if one can look at the current positions, how they have changed over time is also important. I did compare the Democratic candidate's energy positions in August, and again in November. Major changes had occurred. If I were a journalist, assigned to cover candidates' positions on the issues full time, I'd have had a database to compare, monitor, and report on these changes. I have an impression that Edwards put up positions early and stuck with them, while Obama filled his similar positions in over time. Hillary not only filled hers in, she made a radical adjustment from the policies that had served her as a NY Senator (such as support for the "Clean Coal" oxymoron, to those she needed for a national campaign (which looked an awful lot like Edward's by November). Who covered that story?
Comment: Yes, that is why Hitler was so beloved by Germans. He also "inspired" them. Brecht was right, it is easier to manipulate people with mush than rational thought.
Comment: To the poly sci student: Read Obama's book: Audacity of Hope. Then read Carl Berstein's biography of Clinton in which he talks about her difficulty in telling the truth. Both should be required reading for poly sci students. Then report back to us. Perhaps you should consider a different field because anyone who is narrow minded & ill-informed enough to judge someone on the color of their skin & say the essence of a person is solely what has been created by the media, should be in a different field. Maybe math, not a people science. Do some research next time before you embarrass yourself again.
Comment: Just pointing out that you told the poly sci student to read a book "by" Obama and "about" Hillary. I haven't read either one myself, just saying that you created a rather biased playing field.
Comment: Well, at least Obama has written 2 books in which the public can evaluate who he is in his own words without relying on the media. The man has both style and substance, something the media and other politicains lack and fail to grasp.
Comment: To the political science student: Please read Barck Obama's book, the Audacity of Hope. Then read Carl Berstein's book about Hillary, A Women in Control. (in which he speaks of her difficulty in telling the truth) Then report back to us. Both should be required reading for a poly sci student. Perhaps you should consider a different field, because someone so ill-informed & narrow mined as to judge a person by the color of their skin & to say someone's value is solely created by the media needs to study something like math, not a people science.
Comment: PHD for Hillary, I am so with you!!!! I am sick of stupid young people pulling down the rest of us. I study political science and I know better than to vote for Obama. He really is created by the media and it kills me!! But even more so because I am black. I am so angry and disappointed with young people like me and black people like me. We are too smart to be voting for someone just because he shares our race or he seems youthful. And Obama is not Kennedy or MLK!! It insults both of them to compare him to them.
Comment: Thank you! I just had a long talk with my Prof. who is also Black and older, woman, and she is horrified of what is going on. The first Black president woud be someone whose speeches are written by white 26-year-old guy from Massachussetts who does not even have a graduate degree. They are projected for Obama and he reads them. It's a freaking circus. I just hope people realize what they're doing because if he is actually elected, it will a total compromitation for Black folks. After he fails miserably on his face.
Comment: You want a heart?
and this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0cnePDVt-g&feature=related
And watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlATFrHhMQc
Comment: Check this out. HIllary is 13 points up from Obama in today's Gallup polls. But, that's not news of course: http://www.gallup.com/poll/104200/Gallup-Daily-Tracking-Election-2008.aspx
Obama is like Paris Hilton, an empty media created vacuum. I wonder if his supporters do know that he does not write his own speeches, but a white guy writes them? I wonder how African-Americans would feel about that.
About the youth vote: Hillary won youth vote in Cal and Mass, where is the highest saturation of smart youth vote (think Harvard, MIT, BU, Brandeis in Mass, Stanford, CALTech, UCLA, Berkeley). Those are so called brainy youths. So, Obama basically wins the dumb youths of this coutry who want to feel progressive and cool, but can't do your basic fact check research.
Comment: It was a heart issue that really got me involved. When I read Obama's comments on being "mindful of the cruelty that is perpetrated on animals," I felt compelled to do something. I gave myself a crash course in editing and uploading, and produced my first video ever to support a candidate who believes that "how we treat animals reflects how we treat wach other." I hope that "Pets for Obama" on YouTube touches the hearts of other animal lovers.
Comment: Lastly, those who are using attack/delegitimizing tactics: you should be ashamed. Vote for Romney, or not, because of his record in Massachussetts or with the Olympics. Criticize him for changing his stances on some issues, or accept that people do make mistakes or change their minds. Doesn't matter, those are legitimate questions, whether they are driven by head or heart. But that crap about him being Mormon? Hello, he's a Christian. If accepting Christ as your Savior is what matters to you, then he has. If religion is important to you, then be pleased that he's one of the few candidates who's passionate about his (or her) faith and is active in their religious community. If you think that the Mormon Church has some seriously odd-sounding practices, have you looked at your own religion lately? Whether you're Catholic or Baptist or Jewish or Muslim, there are believes or traditions or symbols of devotion that, well, require a leap in faith. At least he's proven a willingness and ability to work with others, regardless of their religion! And his beliefs haven't gone against supporting America's economic engine (investment in science and technology). Why has nobody, not even Newsweek, questioned Huckabee's supposed "tolerance" (as in, barely tolerates) other Christian denominations let alone other religions? How is that going to represent the interests of all Americans across the country, let alone help him work with heads of state who are Russian Orthodox, Catholic, Methodist, Jewish, Sunni, Shia, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, Athiest, and more? Or how his religious beliefs will impact his decisions to fund scientific research? Not asking those questions about Huckabee, and asking the ones being asked about Romney, are... heart.
Comment: P.S. As for the rush to get out???you can't. Not if you want American to have a shred of credibility on anything in any international forum for generations to come. Not unless you want the blood of millions of innocent civilians on your hands as Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palestine, and others plunge into civil war on ethnic, tribal and religious fault lines. Not if you want to avoid giving a green light to all who hate America and want to attack America to go ahead and have fun. The situation was created by the fumbling, ignorant incompetence of a President who had never left the country before, ignored centuries of history, sneered at nation building, and was dazzled by blind ideology, but it's something that all Americans will have to wear for decades to come. The US is in Iraq and Afghanistan until you can nurture moderation in local leaders, build up civil society, support good governance and jump-start failing economies. Deal with it. That's reality. And EVERY legitimate candidate knows it, and will do it.
Comment: It is a shame that everyone can't see this. People want us dead, and our own media and some politicians do nothing but embolden the enemy through their words and attempts to weaken the US
Comment: Interesting how an article about voting with hearts not head has most here passionately supporting one candidate, with much of the "evidence" being little more than justification for hearts leading the head!
Obama and Clinton have virtually the same platform... so, those lobbing criticisms that the other plan, that's heart.
Both are very intelligent, and both have proven themselves good at plying the political backrooms. With Clinton, you aren't involved in federal politics for decades otherwise. With Obama, he's been on the scene for less time, but look at the splash he's made, getting the lemmings (ie journalists) and political veterans on board. So, are your arguments heart or head?
Both have outspoken, educated, intelligent spouses who are active in the campaigns, and will both be co-Presidents (following in Eleanor Roosevelt's footprints). To say otherwise, that's heart.
The Iraq war... folks, you forget, virtually all Americans were for it. Yup, Obama was against; in hindsight, a good call. But Clinton was in Congress; how could a Senator from NEW YORK vote otherwise?! Particularly given the evidence that Bush claimed to have, and key members of Congress were shown and told their caucus it was good. Saying Hillary or Barack were more right is... heart.
Both Hillary and Barack can collaborate for legislative successes, it???s in their records.
It's true that Hillary is polarizing, but how much of that is refusal to vote for any woman? What about the many who won't be able to stomach a black man sitting in the Oval Office? Maybe seeing Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice in a Presidents??? inner circle have helped voters picture someone other than (yet another) white male as President. That decision will be heart.
And, claims that a President will create jobs or close the border or make you safe are dreams. No head of state, other than a dictator, has that power.
Look at your candidate with a clear dispassionate eye, and level the same criticism against him/her as you would her/his challengers to the nomination, or whomever wins the nomination on the other side. Nobody's perfect, and it's highly unlikely than ANY of them fully reflects everything you believe in; it???s a leap of faith. Who represents you best? Who has the best chance of steering America where you want it to go? Who???s most electable? Avoid the trap of ideology trumping reason. You're just coming off a Presidency where your head of state never came across a fact that he couldn't ignore if it didn't match perfectly with his beliefs.
Comment:
I use my head and my heart and both tell me Clinton is the wrong person to lead our Country. How can a person who cries because of the pressure of the elections handle the pressure of being President?
A woman could lead our Country but Hillary is not that woman.
Don???t vote because of race or gender. Vote for a candidate who supports the issues you believe in.
Comment: Now we know why every friggin' mormon in the country votes for Rmney. Even the Harry "pinky" Reid Dems vote for him. Their devil identifies with their devil.
Comment: If the media-- Newsweek among them-- only publish chirpy stories about a candidates' childhood, or career, or spouse, or pets, it's no wonder that the majority of voters use "character" as their yardstick, rather than a candidates positions, experience, plans, and acceptability (domestic and international).
There has been a marked dumbing-down of politics, and as a result declining voter turn out, and the increasing belief that candidates (and, in some cases, even parties) are interchangeable. That isn't surprising, when you look at what makes the TV news. Even Newsweek, which until this election at least could be counted upon to report on platforms, has now jumped on the personality bandwagon.
As a voter, I want to know their previous record, their experience, their platform, and their plans for what they want to do. I want to know if they are familiar with the leading issues, domestic and international. It doesn't matter if I'd rather do lunch with Hillary or Barack or Mitt or John, because it will never happen; from a Presidential candidate's perspective, I'm a nobody. What does matter is whether members of Congress can and will work with them, and whether the Presidents and Prime Ministers of Canada, Germany, Britain, France, Japan, China, Russia, etc respect and can work with them. I'm not electing a buddy, I'm voting for the head of state. So, stop underestimating me, and other voters. True, not everyone will bother to learn everything, but at least make it easy for them to find out the facts, and you'll be surprised at how well they use them.
Comment: Thank you for your comments. I feel the exact same way but I haven't seen that many people writing about this stuff.
Comment: If the media-- Newsweek among them-- only publish chirpy stories about a candidates' childhood, or career, or spouse, or pets, it's no wonder that the majority of voters use "character" as their yardstick, rather than a candidates positions, experience, plans, and acceptability (domestic and international).
There has been a marked dumbing-down of politics, and as a result declining voter turn out, and the increasing belief that candidates (and, in some cases, even parties) are interchangeable. That isn't surprising, when you look at what makes the TV news. Even Newsweek, which until this election at least could be counted upon to report on platforms, has now jumped on the personality bandwagon.
As a voter, I want to know their previous record, their experience, their platform, and their plans for what they want to do. I want to know if they are familiar with the leading issues, domestic and international. It doesn't matter if I'd rather do lunch with Hillary or Barack or Mitt or John, because it will never happen; from a Presidential candidate's perspective, I'm a nobody. What does matter is whether members of Congress can and will work with them, and whether the Presidents and Prime Ministers of Canada, Germany, Britain, France, Japan, China, Russia, etc respect and can work with them. I'm not electing a buddy, I'm voting for the head of state. So, stop underestimating me, and other voters. True, not everyone will bother to learn everything, but at least make it easy for them to find out the facts, and you'll be surprised at how well they use them.
Comment: PS - more proof that Hillary (who has suddenly dropped the Rodham??) Clinton is dishonest - when running for NY Senate, second term, a hot issue to New York residents was that she not be using it as a stepping stone to a presidential election, as they wanted to be sure she was focusing on New York and the role she was being elected to - taking it serious, representing the people. Here is something from that time:
With her New York election just 10 months away, neither she nor her advisers want to do anything that might suggest that she has ambitions beyond the state, where Republicans once pilloried her as a carpetbagger intent on using the state as a stepping stone for national office.
So, again, she "danced around it," but at one time she did, in fact, deny that she would run to get elected Senator - saying she was all about New York, cared about the state, the people and the causes and would focus on just that. Well, here we are, months later, and she's been focusing on nothing more than the campaign she said she wouldn't undertake, leaving New York behind (which she never did care about or do a single thing for if you look at her record). She was nothing more than a CARPETBAGGER - and you want that as your president (or co-president, as we know Bill won't be spending his time decorating the White House, preparing dinner menus and decorating Christmas trees, which is his role).
Comment: Too funny.
Hillary was a carpetbagger? Nooooo! Can't be.
No sh*t she was carpetbagging. That's why New Yorkers voted for her. They WANTED to be used as a stepping stone to the presidency.
Was there some dolt somewhere that actually belived the "she was all about New York, cared about the state, the people and the causes and would focus on just that" line of BS? Maybe. But the handful of drooling idiots incapable of seeing through her machinations hardly numbered in the dozens; much less the thousands required to elect her in a landslide.
New Yorkers got what they wanted. I don't hear them complaining.
Comment: could we start discussing the potential Supreme Court nominees? What will happen to women if McCain wins and appoints more conservatives? What kind of justices will a Democratic president appoint? We need balance, and if there are more conservatives on the court, all of our lives will be affected, and many of us are quite worried about privact rights, sexual orientation rights, and the right to choose. When will this be discussed in the political forum?
Comment: I agree with madmargie, I too am a lifelong republican, and I am almost ashamed to admit it thanks to dubya.
I did an unjustified and unpopular war (Vietnam). I was always TOTALLY opposed to the was in Iraq. We have all discovered that it was not justified. Now that we're there, it'll be a real problem to exit. I disagree that we should leave right now at all haste. As soon as possible - yes, the problem is to determine when.
Comment: What happened to the fact that the question was Head versus Heart and which is better. Were getting off track. Guess as I've said before, head will prevail over heart. Think then speak. Not the other way around. The new is now constantly saying how Obama is gaining strength in the polls, and leading in others. POLLS agian, and the poll people will run to vote the POLLS.. Such a sad state of affairs.. I can only hope that when it comes down to the vote that really counts that the people of this country can pull thier heads out.
Comment: I would NEVER trust Mrs Clinton. How dare she even talk about health care issue when, after 8 years, no one was for the better except the HMO's and the insurance companies. Don't forget that Mr Clinton gave her that job. I refuse the argument that the congress was of a Republican tint. That's for politicians to sort out amoung themselves; that's what they do.
We should take example of the French, sort out the problems of their system, and then run with it.
Comment: You're obviously forgetting that she was not allowed to continue with the health care fight once the Republicans and some Democrats alike shut her down back then. Times have changed - she has not - she still has the same deep beliefs she had then - the difference is she's got the power now and can make these changes happen (unlike our other choice who can't seem to come up with details on anything - only knows how to talk.)
Comment: I have a VERY difficult time believing Clinton. Bill's first campaign promised changes and evolution in the health program. The job was given to Mrs Clinton. Results - Nada, in fact things got worse for everyone except the HMO's and insurance companies. They had eight years. Why in the world should we give her another chance to tool us around.
Comment: Comment: I think those voting with there hearts, vote Obama, they have not paid attention to his campaign and how he has talk about change. If he is so much for change then why has he gone to one of the oldest and none change families in the Dem Party (Kennedy). He got the support of the people who are riding the train of popularity to remain in the spot light and possibly secure a future in politics. Even if Obama comes up short they win by simply stating we where for change, and we will continue our effort. They know how to play the game and are doing it now. Look at Kerry, his V.P. choice was running for the Office and he did not even support him. He ran decided he needed to secure his future as did the Kennedys. If you use your head you could have seen this. Your heart maybe in the right place, but your heart will be broken. So a word to the wise think before you vote. I can say the this has been an interesting process so far, but one that I am afraid to say is more about who you like and not who will best secure and lead our country. Vote your head not your heart and we will all be better off.
Comment: I feel that the best canididates are those with the best fully rounded educational backround,followed most importantly by their experience in politics. A candidate with a world view, the big picture.
I vote for a person and their position on important issues,never on party lines. I would like to see this country adopt a parlimentary government . The two party system is divisive and archaic.
Marguerite
Comment: HILLARY IS SO ENTRENCHED WITH BIG MONEY AND LOBBYIST! HOW CAN YOU CHANGE THE WAY THINGS ARE DONE IN WASHINGTON IF YOU ARE PART OF PROBLEM ?
Comment: HILLARY IS SO ENTRECHED WITH BIG MONEY AND LOBBYIST.HOW CAN YOU FUNDIMENTALY CHANGE THE WAY THING GET DONE IN WASHINGTON IF YOU ARE PART OF PROBLEM?
Comment: It is my opinion that voting is too forced on people. This results in people who are uneducated on issues and candidates voting simply because they can. Voting should be seen as a privilege, not a right. Since I haven't had the time or interest to really study candidates and where they stand, I'm not going to vote because i don't feel I have the information to make an educated vote. Sure, I read the news everyday, but in order to make a real intelligent decision, a person needs to go deeper. As 'Tired of Media Spin' stated, research should be done from facts, not the media. I hope you vote media spin, and I wish all people who vote dig as deep as you have. As for me, I'm going to set an example and keep my politically uneducated self from the booth.
Comment: It is my opinion that voting is too forced on people. This results in people who are uneducated on issues and candidates voting simply because they can. Voting should be seen as a privilege, not a right. Since I haven't had the time or interest to really study candidates and where they stand, I'm not going to vote because i don't feel I have the information to make an educated vote. Sure, I read the news everyday, but in order to make a real intelligent decision, a person needs to go deeper. As 'Tired of Media Spin' stated, research should be done from facts, not the media. I hope you vote media spin, and I wish all people who vote dig as deep as you have. As for me, I'm going to set an example and keep my politically uneducated self from the booth.
Comment: I vote with my head. That is to say I wouldn't vote for a Republican if you held a gun to my head., which might be next if they continue to have their way of slyly denying our civil rights.
Comment: I vote with my head. I study the issues and then check the positions of the candidates. Those who voted with their hearts go us into this position with the Bush presidency. I am a lifelong Republican but I may never vote Republican again unless they can come up with a candiidate who doesn't trade on emotionalism. I want a president with a brain.
Comment: I vote with my head. I study the issues and the stands of the candidates. I am a registered Republican but am so disgusted with the Republican party after the Bush fiasco, that I vote Democrat now until the Republican Party gets it's act together and gives us a valid choice. I want someone to win who will get us out of Iraq and the middle east....fast!
Margie
Comment: That would be Ron Paul. He has said time and time again that he will pull our troops out immediately. He has the morals the conservative republicans like and the logical and clear headed approach to foriegn affairs, economy, and federal aide the rest of the republicans like so much. He is the only true republican in the last 100 years to run for the presidency. He is the only one who believes in severly downsizing the federal government and lowering taxes (and I don't mean a miniscul 1/2 a percent he wants to downsize taxes 35% no more income tax)
Comment: From experience of the last two elections, the Media makes the candidate. They do not concentrate on the issues and absolute truth on the past. This year and from this time forward, I researched the issues not from media but from facts. This Country is in bad shape due to Media Spin and their corporate mandate to make money. We do not have true journelists anymore, we have propaganda $$ lobbiests that just bring us Jerry Springer crap. I have researched these candidates, and Hillary Clinton is the one I am voting for. First, she was instrumental in getting help for abused children, she brought in S Chip - insurance for children and she did fight the insurance companies - but republicans stopped it in Congress. They were the guys being paid off by insurance companies. Obama caved in for medical insurance companies in Illinois and their people have a horrible insurance coverage - non for people who have depression problems. Obama claims Kennedy status and truthfully - John F Kennedy had experience, 12 years in the Senate as well as serving in the military. Obama is no John F Kennedy. He is also NO Martin Luther King - King walked the talk - what has Obama done - nothing. He has brought no jobs to Illinois citizens. His health plan has a donut hole. Now, this I do know - because I have battling healthcare for employers and employees - His plan stinks, it is called a "sick" plan in the industry - parents not getting insurance because they cannot afford it. A campaign lobbiest on his campaign. When are we going to grow up and take care of our Nation instead of this french fry approach to democracy.,
Comment: adamskr you are absolutely right, "speech-making and empty promises" do not make a good President! VOTE! That is why I will vote OBAMA, and encourage others to do the same!
Comment: adamskr you are absolutely right, "speech-making and empty promises" do not make a good President! VOTE OBAMA!!!!!
Comment: I vote with my head, experience tells me that is why we got Bush. I truly believe
Americcans are not stupid. When are we going to take back America from the media! Their infatuation for Obama reminds me of their infatuation for Bush. When will we learn?
Comment: Anyone who votes (or makes any important decision) with their heart instead of their head, is immature and asking for diappointment.
Comment: Anyone who votes (or makes any important decision) with their heart instead of their head, is immature and asking for diappointment.
Comment: As usual the media has hijacked the election and favored the corrupted system members. People haven't got the guts for real change we just talk about doing what's necessary. We are spoiled by decades of easy times. Mr. Paul is the only one that's got it figured out but there's little chance of electing him. We don't have the courage to back him or any one like him.
Comment: What do you want more of the same or a change. If you want more of the same, vote for the established political professionals that say whatever will get them elected. There is only one candidate on either side that is talking solutions that are unpopular but will restore the USA to where we were before greedy and the elite brotherhood took control decades ago. Mr. Ron Paul if you read his platform is pro constitution, pro freedom. A good leader is ok but where are they leading?????
Comment: vote Hillary! The cult-like frenzy around Obama is creepy. Speech-making and empty promises does not make a good President! vote Hillary!
Comment: We don't need another lying Clinton in the White House. If she wins, move them into a trailer.
Comment: Obama's cult-like following is bothering me. The irrational comments about Hillary Clinton are also troubling. My well thought out choice is Hillary Clinton. She is sharp, aggressive and I truly believe she will fight tooth and nail for the American public. Obama seems self-serving to me. Again, the cult-like feeling I get from his supporters is just creepy. I am not won over by speech-making and promises you an't keep. Hillary will get my vote!
Comment: Yup, same here.
Comment: We don't need another lying Clinton in the White House. If she is elected move them into a trailer.
Comment: we dont need a preacher we ned a leader vote clinton
Comment: we dont need a preacher we need a leader vote for clinton
Comment: Conservatives are the masters when it comes to appealing to the emotional of fear ??? this has made the Republican Party the home to the ignorant, irrational, passionate fanatic.
Conservatives are driven by irrational emotional and dogmatic instincts...
as elucidated in a paper titled Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition
http://www.wam.umd.edu/~hannahk/bulletin.pdf
Once in power conservatives are guided by the same irrational thought and grossly overestimate themselves and abilities.
http://www.wam.umd.edu/~hannahk/bulletin.pdf
???. Enter GW Bush.
Comment: Conservatives are driven by irrational emotional and dogmatic instincts:
As elucidated in a paper titled Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition
http://www.wam.umd.edu/~hannahk/bulletin.pdf
Once in power conservatives are guided by the same irrational thought and grossly overestimate themselves and abilities.
http://www.wam.umd.edu/~hannahk/bulletin.pdf
???. Enter GW Bush.
Comment: It's important to vote with both your head and heart. People need to analyze which candidate matches their view of society and its problems, and offers the best solutions. They also need to vote for a candidate who inspires them personally to help create those realistic answers. Obama has not provided enough concrete solutions--particularily in health care. The best CHANGE for our society which would improve everyone's life is for true universal health care. Imagine never worrying about whether you can get health care when you or a family member needs it. Imagine just graduating from college and not being told --get a job with health care because you are now off your parents plan. You could really pursue your dreams-- start a business-- write a novel-- travel. Imagine not worrying about health coverage when you lose your job at 59 during a recession. Imagine not losing your home because of a medical crisis. That's CHANGE. That's inspiring. That's Hilary.
Comment: And how do you suppose we pay for universal healthcare? Hmmmm I think that comes in the form of a tax and I'm sorry 35% of my income and 10% of everything else I buy so in actuality I pay nearly half of my income to pay for services to support an occupation and an over bearing federal government. And now you want to raise that tax to pay for people who can't seem to make enough for health care. We have a faulty economic system that needs to be corrected, how about you put the 35% of hard earned money I made back into my pocket where it belongs and then I will have no problem paying for healthcare. Raising taxes to pay for someone else's problems is not an practical nor intelligent.
Comment: yeah, live off everybody else's hard work, while you get to play around
Comment: I vote with my head. Look at what 2000 wrought when voters chose a candidate based on who they would rather have a beer with. Look how "great" that turned out!
Comment: Comment: I believe that too many people vote thier heart and not with thier head. I they looked at the facts and watched the politics they would see clearly. Most people only listen to POLLS and what they see on the talk shows, not the news. Most people are to busy to see that Obama who is Mr. Change, is backed by the one of the oldest polictical none change families in Washington. He also has the back stabbing, backing of Kerry, who failed to back his V.P. choice, in his time of need. Oprah also said "Hillary you run, I will support you. " People are not looking at the overall picture, and the young voters don't realize the impact thier choice will have on the country as a whole. If Obama wanted the respect of older and more loyal supporters he should have said to those people Thanks but no thanks. I am for change not, change to secure YOUR future. I lost alot of respect for Obama, after he started, walking with the old, and talking change. I have not made a final decision as of yet and am an independent. I believe in voting for the best person that can do the job. Secure Americas future and will be best for my childrens future. So I urge you all to look deep in your heart and then think of your family, your future and Americas future.....your thinking will lead to the right decision. Don't vote for someone based on the people who may have special meaning to you as they only ride the train of the popular, the will give them an edge in the end. Watch for these quotes from one of the people who are now a supporter of change I supported change and change lost, but if you vote for me now I wll keep the spirit of change alive. Or, I was there when the change came about and I will be there to see it through. Please vote your head not your heart and it will secure all of us a great future.
Comment: History clearly shows the heart wins over logic. How else could you get a Hitler who clearly demonstrated his insanity in his writings easily available to all? Yet, he caused great excitment and promise in desparate times. He promised everything, including clearing out the Jews. The heart does not always tell the truth even though love songs make it seem so. So, we make bad choices. Other examples? Castro, Chavez, Mao, Charlie Manson. At times I'd like to throw in with that list a few right wing talk show hosts. They are talented speakers and motivators but crazy as a loon. Yet, people believe them. No logic there.
GO USA!!!
Comment: I vote with both my head and my heart. It is impossible to separate the two. No matter how much you think you are making a totally logical choice there is always some emotion involved. It is an emotional thing to vote even when you are being logical. I am a backer of Obama as I think he is the first person in years who can bring people together to work as one. When someone can get former critics to come to their side like he can get Repulicans and other Democrats that person has gained a strong supporter as one who has come over from another side has usually done alot of soul searching and come to the conclusion that their new choice, Obama in this case, is the real answer to getting things done. That is my humble opinion.
Comment: To have even the potential of an informed electorate--i.e., one which votes with its head--requires news coverage that informs. The "reporting" of this year's primary campaign has struck me overall as shallow and, in some cases, as uncritical as the coverage we were subjected to during the leadup to the invasion of Iraq. One has to wonder how much the enthusiasm so many journalists and commentators have displayed at the prospect of a brokered convention--maybe two of them--where they can get their own self-indulgent jollies has influenced what we've read in print and seen on our TV and computer screens over the past several months. A lot of it has been cloying fluff, not substance, and in many instances irrelevant and certainly contributory to "heart-influenced" voting decisions.
This past week's media drool over the Kennedy clan endorsements--well, at least the endorsements of those Kennedys supporting the media's darling--is a case in point. It's notable that the candidate who insists he's the only one focused on the future has so heartily courted, and embraced, the imprimatur of the politicians of the past he said only a couple of months ago were incapable of effecting change.
I don't give a hoot about nostalgia or likeability or any of the other irrelevant hoopla or pap the media has rammed down our throats this campaign season. I've listened to what the candidates have said and promised, I've sifted substance from rhetoric, I've looked up their legislative records and pertinent history, and I've concluded that Hillary Clinton is the candidate I'll vote for.
Comment: Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I respect what you've said.
As a progressive Democrat, I remain undecided . . . and so are my similarly progressive octogenarian parents, who have seen much of politics over their lifetimes. What a thrill it is for them (and me) to finally have the opportunity to choose between a woman and an African American man to become the Democratic Party's nominee for the presidency! But this makes it all the more important to avoid emotionalism and inflammatory rhetoric, and to focus on the evidence -- the biographies, political records, character, and positions of each. We need to learn more of the facts before we can make our informed, confident decisions. That being said, given what we know at this point, we are leaning towards Hillary Clinton, because we have ample reason to believe that she is entirely capable of doing the job and doing it well.
Comment: The problem is that woman are willing to vote for ANY woman just to get one in office. That is self-defeating their cause for two reasons. First, they are not electing a woman in office with Hillary. They are also electing Bill Clinton in office once again - he has made that very clear. Second, voting the WRONG woman in office will self-defeat their cause greatly because history will not repeat itself, even if a great woman comes before voters. America will not risk another mistake and will never vote another woman in. So when you make history for the first time, make sure it's CORRECT THE FIRST TIME. This is not the case right now. Bush is paying for Bill Clinton's mistakes, and Bush has made a lot of his own. It's time to break the Clinton/Bush era and move forward in America. Hillary couldn't tell the truth if it were standing in front of her. Her record and her own statements show that. There are two candidates before us who present as as honest as we can possibly get in politics - Obama and Huckabee. I am a registered Independent and vote for who I think will most bring our country forward. I see one from each party who can do that. Personally, I am choosing Obama, but you take your pick. Let's move America forward - it is well beyond time. Let's not go backwards. The Clinton's had eight years, the Bush's had 16 (father/son). Let's not give the Clintons' 16 - they didn't earn that right and we don't need to go backwards. Plus, they owe too many favors and America should't pay them back. Please, vote with your head - not based on gender.
Comment: Please don't generalize that way. I am a woman, and have been suporting Barack Obama since he announced his candidacy.
It is sexist to say women are willing to vote for any woman "just to get one in office". It is also untrue.
Comment: I, too, Mahalo, real name Ann, am a woman. I wasn't trying to generalize. I was calling it as I am seeing it. I see so many women out there who are voting for Hillary Clinton based on gender and it is appaling. I am ashamed at their behavior and lack of judgment. It isn't a reflection of all of us, but it is certainly a broad pattern being seen that is scaring me!
Comment: I vote with both my head and my heart. It is impossible to separate the two. No matter how much you think you are making a totally logical choice there is always some emotion involved. It is an emotional thing to vote even when you are being logical. I am a backer of Obama as I think he is the first person in years who can bring people together to work as one. When someone can get former critics to come to their side like he can get Repulicans and other Democrats that person has gained a strong supporter as one who has come over from another side has usually done alot of soul searching and come to the conclusion that their new choice, Obama in this case, is the real answer to getting things done. That is my humble opinion.
Comment: What about a President that can eep this enthusiasm for what our government is doing lonng after the election?
How great would it be to have this kind of passion and dialogue about all sorts of issues that so many people care deeply about on going, not just through primaries or the GE.
I believe Barack Obama is the President that not only will inspire Americans to get involved, but the only one that will allow the process to be transparent.
If that is my heart rather than my head speaking, so be it. This country and the world could use more love!
Comment: This is the problem right now. Women are voting for HIllary just to get a woman in office. However, not realizing that Bill is co-running with her, and voting for the WRONG woman means they are self-defeating their own cause. They will never get another women elected (even the best one) because Hillary will destroy that based on the FACT that she is the wrong candidate. The woman can't tell the truth even if it were standing in front of her. It's so sad. This is a critical election for our country. There are only two candidates who are close to honest as we can get - Obama and Huckabee. Based on your party, take your pick. I'm registered independent and I go with the facts. Obama has my vote. But both are willing to push this country forward and in a new direction. The others, quite frankly, based on their records, are not. Let's bring this country forward. It is well beyond time. Bush has paid hard for Bill Clinton's errors (and Bush has made a lot of his own). Let's get out of the Bush/Clinton hold and move forward. PLEASE!
Comment: Exactly what were Bill's errors? Besides some personal indescretions (which I'm sure 99% of the past presidents have been guilty of) - exactly what other errors?
Comment: I think those voting with there hearts, vote Obama, they have not paid attention to his campaign and how he has talk about change. If he is so much for change then why has he gone to one of the oldest and none change families in the Dem Party (Kennedy). He got the support of the people who are riding the train of popularity to remain in the spot light and possibly secure a future in politics. Even if Obama comes up short they win by simply stating we where for change, and we will continue our effort. They know how to play the game and are doing it now. Look at Kerry, his V.P. choice was running for the Office and he did not even support him. He ran decided he needed to secure his future as did the Kennedys. If you use your head you could have seen this. Your heart maybe in the right place, but your heart will be broken. So a word to the wise think before you vote. I can say the this has been an interesting process so far, but one that I am afraid to say is more about who you like and not who will best secure and lead our country. Vote your head not your heart and we will all be better off.
Comment: I vote with my head that is why I prefer a Clysdale to a showhorse. When the mud gets deep and the load is just one boxcar of hard work after another. I want a proven workhorse. That is why I choose Hillary .
I want a president good for every family , not just good for the Kennedy family.
I want .a president who a good answer to immergration, not a put them first at the DMV
Comment: The only REAL change you are going to get is to vote for Ron Paul! If you want WAR and the never ending spending of YOUR tax dollars, then I'm sure the media has brainwashed you to pick one of the other canidates. WAKE UP PEOPLE!!! Stop settling for the lesser of two evils and vote for CHANGE! This isnt just my life, it's OURS!!!!!
Comment: Why would you vote with anything other than your head? Unless you know these canidates personally, to vote with heart is pointless. People need to start looking paying attention to the issues and not how many hands they shake or how many babies they carry. This election is a crucial point in our lives, WAR, ECONOMY, IMMIGRATION and with that you vote with your HEAD!
Comment: Too many people vote with their heart and not their head- most of those people are Democrats- they vote emotionally - not intellectually.
Comment: Lizzy, you really ought to re-examine the evidence before you make such unfounded, sweeping statements. From what I have seen, quite the opposite is often the case.
Comment: Lizzy is a Republican, but she is correct. Who would vote for anyone before they checked the facts. Not media spin - that has brought us Bush, A War in Iraq, and now it is going to bring us Obama. Who would vote for any person that rewrote a bill that Nuclear Plants did not have to report nuclear leaks. And, this nuclear plan, Exelon, has given Obama $200,000 for his presidential bid for the white house. It is insane, and to top it off. Obama is still not telling the truth on his website - he states he did mandate it. Democrats need to wake up. I have been a Democrat for 30 years, I am going to change parties. I cannot in good concious vote for Obama. After checking his record, he is no better than Bush. He does not walk the talk. I am tired of Rhetoric - it is too dangerous for our Country. I will have to vote for McCain. And this makes me sick, but not as sick as voting for Obama.
Comment: I can relate to this, logic would have everyone voting for Ron Paul because he wants to kick the bums out who are not following the Constitution, and allowing the Government to slowly steal your rights from you under the guise of national security, when the government will admit themselves that they cant protect you 100% of the time. WAKE UP AMERICA.
The Government, including Romney, McCain and Huckabee want to give you a little stimulas package that you will have to claim on your Taxes. were as Ron Paul wants to let us keep all of our money,
He wants to keep the Government taxing only what they are allowed to tax, not the lies being put out by these other senators and congressmen who buckle in to the threats from the IRS.
how could you not vote to eliminate the IRS Huh.WAKE UP AMERICA
Comment: Anxiety and enthusiasm are a small part of what leads us to our desicions no doubt but emotions are also part of the thinking process and can't be dismissed as mundane. To think and make a wise choice one must use all his/her senses and I have seen this through out this primary with people I have spoken to. These emotions of the heart help propel people to asl questions and compare.
Hillary can't be trusted as president or as a woman. She carries too much dirt and many secrets. She doesn't mind the lobbiests in Washington, after all they have suported her. When she ran for NY Senator she recieved high contributions from defense contractors and the health care industry. She is the first New Yorker to sit on the Senate Armed Services Committeeon. Now I have to ask myself,
1. How much did that effect her vote to go to war with Iraq?
2. How will this effect bringing our boys home?
3. How will that effect how we conduct ourselves in Afganistan?
4. How can she effectively work with health care to bring medical costs down?
At the time she accpeted those contributions, Frederick H. Graefe, a health care lawyer and lobbyist in Washington for more than 20 years, said, ???People in many industries, including health care, are contributing to Senator Clinton today because they fully expect she will be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008.???
One hand washes the other as they say.
She still can't admit she made a mistake voting to go to war.
She has pitted one minority group against another. The old man establishment needs this to keep the status quo. Keep the underdogs fighting so they can't see what we are doing. Toss them a bone here and there and they won't take away from our feasts.
I am a white 59 yr. old granmother who would have loved seeing the first woman president. After much though on the issues and what is at stake in this country as well as the world today I have chosen to vote for Obama.
I will never trust her as president or as a woman. She carries too much dirt and many secrets. She doesn't mind the lobbiests in Washington, after all they have suported her. When she ran for NY Senator she recieved high contributions from defense contractors and the health care industry. She is the first New Yorker to sit on the Senate Armed Services Committeeon. Now I have to ask myself,
1. How much did that effect her vote to go to war with Iraq?
2. How will this effect bringing our boys home?
3. How will that effect how we conduct ourselves in Afganistan?
4. How can she effectively work with health care to bring medical costs down?
At the time she accpeted these contributions, Frederick H. Graefe, a health care lawyer and lobbyist in Washington for more than 20 years, said, ???People in many industries, including health care, are contributing to Senator Clinton today because they fully expect she will be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008.???
One had washes the other as they say.
Comment: You are very political for a Granmother. Having trust issues since she is a woman? So you never saw a politician with a secret in your life. You must be so naive. Obama just did not get his chance yet, Ok?. If you guys hand it over to this person, you might as well say Ta Ta to Democrat's goal of winning the WH in November. O no, You did not say you are a democrat, did you?
Comment: Anxiety and enthusiasm are a small part of what leads us to our desicions no doubt but emotions are also part of the thinking process and can't be dismissed as mundane. To think and make a wise choice one must use all his/her senses and I have seen this through out this primary with people I have spoken to. These emotions of the heart help propel people to asl questions and compare.
Hillary can't be trusted as president or as a woman. She carries too much dirt and many secrets. She doesn't mind the lobbiests in Washington, after all they have suported her. When she ran for NY Senator she recieved high contributions from defense contractors and the health care industry. She is the first New Yorker to sit on the Senate Armed Services Committeeon. Now I have to ask myself,
1. How much did that effect her vote to go to war with Iraq?
2. How will this effect bringing our boys home?
3. How will that effect how we conduct ourselves in Afganistan?
4. How can she effectively work with health care to bring medical costs down?
At the time she accpeted those contributions, Frederick H. Graefe, a health care lawyer and lobbyist in Washington for more than 20 years, said, ???People in many industries, including health care, are contributing to Senator Clinton today because they fully expect she will be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008.???
One hand washes the other as they say.
She still can't admit she made a mistake voting to go to war.
She has pitted one minority group against another. The old man establishment needs this to keep the status quo. Keep the underdogs fighting so they can't see what we are doing. Toss them a bone here and there and they won't take away from our feasts.
I am a white 59 yr. old granmother who would have loved seeing the first woman president. After much though on the issues and what is at stake in this country as well as the world today I have chosen to vote for Obama.
I will never trust her as president or as a woman. She carries too much dirt and many secrets. She doesn't mind the lobbiests in Washington, after all they have suported her. When she ran for NY Senator she recieved high contributions from defense contractors and the health care industry. She is the first New Yorker to sit on the Senate Armed Services Committeeon. Now I have to ask myself,
1. How much did that effect her vote to go to war with Iraq?
2. How will this effect bringing our boys home?
3. How will that effect how we conduct ourselves in Afganistan?
4. How can she effectively work with health care to bring medical costs down?
At the time she accpeted these contributions, Frederick H. Graefe, a health care lawyer and lobbyist in Washington for more than 20 years, said, ???People in many industries, including health care, are contributing to Senator Clinton today because they fully expect she will be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008.???
One had washes the other as they say.
Comment: Anxiety and enthusiasm are a small part of what leads us to our desicions no doubt but emotions are also part of the thinking process and can't be dismissed as mundane. To think and make a wise choice one must use all his/her senses and I have seen this through out this primary with people I have spoken to. These emotions of the heart help propel people to asl questions and compare.
Hillary can't be trusted as president or as a woman. She carries too much dirt and many secrets. She doesn't mind the lobbiests in Washington, after all they have suported her. When she ran for NY Senator she recieved high contributions from defense contractors and the health care industry. She is the first New Yorker to sit on the Senate Armed Services Committeeon. Now I have to ask myself,
1. How much did that effect her vote to go to war with Iraq?
2. How will this effect bringing our boys home?
3. How will that effect how we conduct ourselves in Afganistan?
4. How can she effectively work with health care to bring medical costs down?
At the time she accpeted those contributions, Frederick H. Graefe, a health care lawyer and lobbyist in Washington for more than 20 years, said, ???People in many industries, including health care, are contributing to Senator Clinton today because they fully expect she will be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008.???
One hand washes the other as they say.
She still can't admit she made a mistake voting to go to war.
She has pitted one minority group against another. The old man establishment needs this to keep the status quo. Keep the underdogs fighting so they can't see what we are doing. Toss them a bone here and there and they won't take away from our feasts.
I am a white 59 yr. old granmother who would have loved seeing the first woman president. After much though on the issues and what is at stake in this country as well as the world today I have chosen to vote for Obama.
I will never trust her as president or as a woman. She carries too much dirt and many secrets. She doesn't mind the lobbiests in Washington, after all they have suported her. When she ran for NY Senator she recieved high contributions from defense contractors and the health care industry. She is the first New Yorker to sit on the Senate Armed Services Committeeon. Now I have to ask myself,
1. How much did that effect her vote to go to war with Iraq?
2. How will this effect bringing our boys home?
3. How will that effect how we conduct ourselves in Afganistan?
4. How can she effectively work with health care to bring medical costs down?
At the time she accpeted these contributions, Frederick H. Graefe, a health care lawyer and lobbyist in Washington for more than 20 years, said, ???People in many industries, including health care, are contributing to Senator Clinton today because they fully expect she will be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008.???
One had washes the other as they say.
Comment: Anxiety and enthusiasm are a small part of what leads us to our desicions no doubt but emotions are also part of the thinking process and can't be dismissed as mundane. To think and make a wise choice one must use all his/her senses and I have seen this through out this primary with people I have spoken to. These emotions of the heart help propel people to asl questions and compare.
Hillary can't be trusted as president or as a woman. She carries too much dirt and many secrets. She doesn't mind the lobbiests in Washington, after all they have suported her. When she ran for NY Senator she recieved high contributions from defense contractors and the health care industry. She is the first New Yorker to sit on the Senate Armed Services Committeeon. Now I have to ask myself,
1. How much did that effect her vote to go to war with Iraq?
2. How will this effect bringing our boys home?
3. How will that effect how we conduct ourselves in Afganistan?
4. How can she effectively work with health care to bring medical costs down?
At the time she accpeted those contributions, Frederick H. Graefe, a health care lawyer and lobbyist in Washington for more than 20 years, said, ???People in many industries, including health care, are contributing to Senator Clinton today because they fully expect she will be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008.???
One hand washes the other as they say.
She still can't admit she made a mistake voting to go to war.
She has pitted one minority group against another. The old man establishment needs this to keep the status quo. Keep the underdogs fighting so they can't see what we are doing. Toss them a bone here and there and they won't take away from our feasts.
I am a white 59 yr. old granmother who would have loved seeing the first woman presiden
