Weekly Opinion/Editorial
ZEAL BUT WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE
by Steve Fair
by Steve Fair
In just four months, America will choose a President. Other important races will be decided- from the local to the statewide level. Within the next ninety days you can expect most everyone you know to become a political expert and commentator on the elections. People who show little interest in politics for twenty-one out of twenty four months will somehow be completely qualified to perform a compenhensive SWOT analysis on every political race. Over coffee and donuts, they will argue their points with the fervor of a TV talking head. They will be convinced they know all the issues in a race, who is winning the race and the strategy necessary to get elected.
From the coffeshop to the bars, from family reunions to pulpits, politics will become the topic of conversation. But unfortunately most of the discussion will not be fact based. It will be based how the media has defined the issues and the “commentators” limited knowledge of politics.
Would you trust a surgeon to operate on you who only picked up a knife every four years? Would you allow a mechanic to work on your car who only worked on cars alternating years? Would you eat in a restaurant that only fired up their kitchen every twenty-four months? Yet, political candidates place their fate in the hands of novices and hobbyists- aka voters- every time they cast their hat in the ring.
Americans don’t stay engaged in the political process very long at a time. People start paying attention to politics from Labor Day to early November so candidates spend a huge amount of time and money in that short window getting their message out. Campaigns craft the message in the most positive simplistic form possible. And it works- political arm chair quarterbacks will debate the issues using the slogan laden messages and make their voting decision on shallow information that most often is not fact based.
The irony is those who will talk politics the loudest in the next ninety days are often not voters. When you vote, the local election board maintains a record of your showing up at the poll. That record is public record. Participation in an election by any individual can be verified by going to the local election board.
Amazingly it’s not just the political talkers who don’t vote, but there are candidates for office who are not regular voters. To be a candidate and not vote regularly is the height of hypocrisy. A principled candidate must have a record of voting in every election. To do otherwise is stating to those that do vote that none of this (politics/government) was important until “you” got involved. Those who don’t vote at every opportunity show no respect for the process. Their walk doesn’t square with their talk. Candidates who do not show up to vote are political opportunists that should get their house in order before they start trying to rule ours.
Political scientists say there are two groups of factors that influence a voter’s decision. The first group of factors is sociological and includes the income, sex, religion, geography and education of a voter. The second group is psychological factors. They include party affiliation, electability and last, but not least, issues in the race. Finding out which of those factors influences the voter is a multi-billion dollar industry. Because few races are run on the issues, the real winners are the consumer (voter) behavior experts. Marketing a candidate like a jar of jelly, the marketers “brand” the candidate to fit the market. They are trained to "sell the sizzle, not the bacon," so they sell not just the candidate, but the image and idea of the candidate. It sounds professional and is effective, but using that logic a candidate doesn’t have to have substance- they only have o be marketable.
Every American has a responsibility to be an informed, intelligent voter that bases their voting decision on the issues. Every candidate, regardless of party affiliation, should be willing to provide upon request a detailed portfolio of the issues in their race and their position. If more voters would ask candidates for that information, perhaps we would weed out the opportunitist and truly change government for the better. There would be less money in politics, because voters would be doing due diligence and making informed decisions by interacting with the candidates. Issues have taken a back seat to image. Substance has been sacrificed for shallowness. From the Court House to the White House, Americans have become apathetic toward politics. Until that changes, the zeal to discuss politics will be there, but without knowledge.
From the coffeshop to the bars, from family reunions to pulpits, politics will become the topic of conversation. But unfortunately most of the discussion will not be fact based. It will be based how the media has defined the issues and the “commentators” limited knowledge of politics.
Would you trust a surgeon to operate on you who only picked up a knife every four years? Would you allow a mechanic to work on your car who only worked on cars alternating years? Would you eat in a restaurant that only fired up their kitchen every twenty-four months? Yet, political candidates place their fate in the hands of novices and hobbyists- aka voters- every time they cast their hat in the ring.
Americans don’t stay engaged in the political process very long at a time. People start paying attention to politics from Labor Day to early November so candidates spend a huge amount of time and money in that short window getting their message out. Campaigns craft the message in the most positive simplistic form possible. And it works- political arm chair quarterbacks will debate the issues using the slogan laden messages and make their voting decision on shallow information that most often is not fact based.
The irony is those who will talk politics the loudest in the next ninety days are often not voters. When you vote, the local election board maintains a record of your showing up at the poll. That record is public record. Participation in an election by any individual can be verified by going to the local election board.
Amazingly it’s not just the political talkers who don’t vote, but there are candidates for office who are not regular voters. To be a candidate and not vote regularly is the height of hypocrisy. A principled candidate must have a record of voting in every election. To do otherwise is stating to those that do vote that none of this (politics/government) was important until “you” got involved. Those who don’t vote at every opportunity show no respect for the process. Their walk doesn’t square with their talk. Candidates who do not show up to vote are political opportunists that should get their house in order before they start trying to rule ours.
Political scientists say there are two groups of factors that influence a voter’s decision. The first group of factors is sociological and includes the income, sex, religion, geography and education of a voter. The second group is psychological factors. They include party affiliation, electability and last, but not least, issues in the race. Finding out which of those factors influences the voter is a multi-billion dollar industry. Because few races are run on the issues, the real winners are the consumer (voter) behavior experts. Marketing a candidate like a jar of jelly, the marketers “brand” the candidate to fit the market. They are trained to "sell the sizzle, not the bacon," so they sell not just the candidate, but the image and idea of the candidate. It sounds professional and is effective, but using that logic a candidate doesn’t have to have substance- they only have o be marketable.
Every American has a responsibility to be an informed, intelligent voter that bases their voting decision on the issues. Every candidate, regardless of party affiliation, should be willing to provide upon request a detailed portfolio of the issues in their race and their position. If more voters would ask candidates for that information, perhaps we would weed out the opportunitist and truly change government for the better. There would be less money in politics, because voters would be doing due diligence and making informed decisions by interacting with the candidates. Issues have taken a back seat to image. Substance has been sacrificed for shallowness. From the Court House to the White House, Americans have become apathetic toward politics. Until that changes, the zeal to discuss politics will be there, but without knowledge.
No comments:
Post a Comment