John Kerry's skill in oration and debate is quite refreshing to me. Along the same lines, Bush's blatant disregard for basic intelligence and the most heinous twisting of Kerry's words is appalling to me. It seems to me that the incumbant's method of persuasion or convincing the American people is to manipulate them, while Kerry's technique is to accurately and soundly debate each of Bush's points and rely on the American people's intelligence.
While my respect for John Kerry grows a great deal as a result, I worry that the average American is not intelligent or perceptive enough to see through the manipulation, or the twisted words. It also doesn't help that Bush has the charisma. John Kerry is incredibly articulate and well-spoken, but Bush has a cute Texan accent and says things like "Nukular," "Peninshula," and "the Internets." I can see why the majority might support Bush. He has poor grammar like most of America. He has a pathetic vocabulary like most of America. He is a posturing, masculine, Christian dogmatic fool like most of America. I am afraid.
Especially striking to me was the continued black-and-whiting of the issues that Bush continued to attempt. "Kerry voted against this." "Kerry voted for that." And Kerry would turn around and explain why -- a provision missing for the safety of the mother; a provision missing for the well-being of a rape victim. Then Bush would turn around and pretend not to understand what Kerry is talking about, and say "It sounds pretty clear to me! He voted against this and against that!" A grown man (-ape) is resorting to preschool tactics to debate the office of the President of the United States. I remember in Middle School when I would pretend not to understand someone's point when I knew it was superior to mine. I would scrunch up my face, roll my eyes, make a smart remark, and twist the words of my opponent. What kills me is that this technique actually speaks to a great deal of the people in this country.
No wonder Republicans find it such a threat that Democrats want to graduate more people from schools and colleges -- they might start to grow out of the puerile manipulability that put Bush in office four years ago.
I will be ashamed of my fellow Americans if the incumbant remains in office in January.
I saw a discussion this morning among a spouse of a co-worker and another co-worker. She said that she was voting for bush because she "believes what he says." I pity her. To be that imperceptive and ignorant. She also happens to be addicted to morphine. Perhaps this is why her judgment is sorely affected.
I hope the address on my driver's license being different from the address on my voter registration doesn't preclude me from voting, but it probably will, and of course we will lose PA as a result.
Somebody needs to have an election party. I have a feeling that I will need a great deal of alcohol as I watch the states turn red. Maybe I will have an election party! What do people think? It would have to be a democratic campaign headquarters type of party. In fact, if you're voting Bush, try not to speak to me for the next four years.
The one thing that gives me hope is that Apathy was the cool thing to do for the last two presidential elections. 2000's election taught a great deal of at least my acquaintances that apathy can cost us your bill of rights. There are a lot of people who didn't vote in the 2000 election that are voting Nov. 2nd. Polls can't possibly poll them very well, because one would imagine that they have registered to vote quite late. I wonder if there is an equal effect among Republicans who are trying to compensate, e.g. "I bet a lot of first-time democrat voters will vote this election; I better register and vote republican to combat that effect." I don't know if most Republicans are that smart. But then, I don't know if the past four years have truly overcome the apathy and laziness rampant among my generation. I suppose we'll find out.
VOTE, dammit!
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
, is me?
2 (5.1%)
