Home Page
Greg's Page
Lori's Page
Building Our House - What a project!
News
Genealogy
Logan's Page
Linden's Page
Alfalfa Hay
Family Photos
Soccer
Classroom Training
 
Brasic Farm Website
 
The Beginning of the End

LastDebate2000
The last debate is over for the 2000 election cycle. According to Nader the two main candidates are as alike as Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle-Dee, but tonight's debate showed marked differences in style if not in substance. Mr. Gore again showed a command of detail. He stalked the stage like a prize fighter and relentlessly attacked his opponent seeking again and again to point out differences in various policy positions.
Mr. Bush again showed a more subdued style, seeking to reinforce his main themes. His jabs at Mr. Gore were mostly thematic, though on some specifics he also pointed out differences.
It was clear that again Mr. Gore was the more skilled debater. He sought again and again for vulnerable spots in Mr. Bush's positions. Mr. Bush seemed committed to his frequently spoken position that he wishes to change the way politics is practiced in Washington DC: That he wants a more conciliatory way of doing things. Mr. Gore on the other hand seemed committed to the politics of divide and conquer. I believe Mr. Gore's consultants have been busy analyzing the publics responses after the first two debates. He was labeled as rude and dishonest after the first debate. His lead in the polls dwindled to a dead heat despite the medias trumpeted proclamations of a Gore victory. This led to the whipped dog style he showed in the second debate. Following the second debate where Mr. Gore apparently was trying to show he could restrain himself, he slipped even further, going from dead even to down by 2 to 6 points depending on which poll and which date you were watching. This led to yet another change in style where his handlers apparently told him to show "The Real Al" this time around. The Real Al was apparently the rude and pushy Al we saw in the first debate.
I don't know how the public will respond to tonight's debate. My own personal feelings I have avoided stating openly, though I believe they show through this time. I think there is a strong feeling among Independents (who will decide this election) that they are tired of sly politicians who glibly lie to us about their intentions and beliefs (if any). I believe this is why Mr. Gore, who has the perfect position set according to polls, has not been able to gain a decisive advantage despite the ten years of economic prosperity that the hard work of American workers and businesses have brought us. It is an axiom of American politics that people always vote their pocketbook. This situation is a clear break from that reasoning for a substantial percentage of American society. It seems clear in this new millennium that the expectations of our elected officials by our people are beginning to change for at least some of our citizens. The days of "what do I get out of this" perhaps will endure for many, but the numbers are unmistakable. The richest 1% of America can't decide any elections in an era of information at the fingertips of all who want it. Despite Mr. Gore's claims that Mr. Bush stands only for the rich (the perennial Democratic claim since FDR) it appears that many ordinary Americans find appeal in Mr. Bush's stance that, as Popeye once said, "I am what I am".
I am an Independent. I have always been an Independent. I have not voted for a Republican for president even once in my life. I voted for John Anderson in 1979 because he was eloquent, intelligent, and stood up for his beliefs. I would have voted for Mr. Reagan in 1984 (I despised Mr. Mondale) but it was so obvious that Mr. Reagan would crush Mr. Mondale that I didn't bother. I felt Mr. Reagan had turned the tide of American pessimism, and was leading us to better days despite his shortcomings. In 1988 I was convinced that Mr. Bush had been dishonest with the public about Iran-Contra so I supported Mr. Dukakis (I also felt Mr. Dukakis believed what he said). In 1992 I was a staunch advocate for Mr. Perot, as I felt Mr. Bush was a poor president for domestic policy, and had been very dirty in the 1988 election. I was dead against Mr. Clinton because he seemed phony and dishonest. He was. In 1996 I again supported Mr. Perot, though unenthusiastically. I felt that Mr. Dole was about as exciting as a dead fish on the beach, and Mr. Clinton was clearly phony and dishonest. Now it is 2000, and again I am faced with a choice between two candidates who I deem imperfect choices. I will not vote third party this time around because this time the choice is too important and the race is too close. I will support Mr. Bush despite the several differences I have with him on policy stances. I am by nature a person who believes in the importance of rights. I support the right to choose though I feel abortion is wrong. I won't sit in judgment of the situation of another in this difficult topic. I support the right to own guns without big brothers interference, despite the current hysteria about gun violence. I am thoroughly familiar with them, and I have yet to see a gun jump up and shoot anything without a person holding it and making the decision to pull the trigger. I also don't blame cars for drunk driving; at some point we have to hold people responsible for their actions. Parents need to be responsible for their guns in houses with children, and I feel that if gun locks are an issue we should give them away for free and convince people to use them voluntarily. This may seem pretty radical to those who think we must protect ourselves from ourselves, but I feel really strongly about that topic (personal responsibility) and I am not afraid to voice my position on it. Lastly I feel people should be allowed to make as many decisions for themselves as they are able. How else can we expect our society to be a responsible one? If a child is raised by parents who make all the decisions for them, they never learn to make decisions appropriately. Why should society, the aggregate of individuals, work differently? This is the main reason I will support Mr. Bush. It is not that I like his stance on the environment; though I am basically pro-business I have always been a staunch advocate of responsible business and I don't just talk about loving the outdoors. I don't agree with many of Mr. Bush's positions, but I can see that he consistently reiterates them, even when they are not popular in the polls. I don't think he will constantly re-invent himself to garner advantage or curry favor with some group that has the trendy topic of today. For these reasons I will support Mr. Bush, and cannot support Mr. Gore. I am a Michigan Independent and I have made my choice.
Don't forget to vote, whoever you will support. Remember, if you don't vote, you don't get to complain about the results later. :)
-Greg

 

Home |  Gregs Page |  Lori's Page |  Our House |  News |  Genealogy |  Logans Page |  Lindens Page |  Alfalfa Hay |  Photos |  Soccer |  Classroom |  Top

57 Hits Since October 2000

Copyright 2001

Last Updated 10/18/00

Powered by Arachne