Chapter 7 in Patterson points out the inconsistency in Americans' political participation and their choice in candidates is critiqued in Chapter 6:
"Athough Americans claim that political participation is important, most do not practice what they preach..." And, "In the everyday world of politics, no source of opinion more clearly divides Americans than that of their partisanship....Some Republicans and Democrats know very little of their party's policies and unthinkingly embrace its candidates."
I thought of this when my neighboor, a two-time supporter of President Bush, sent me this "Candidate Match Game," from the USA Today. The survey said he was closest in his ideology to liberal Democrat Dennis Kucinich. I won't report for the record who the survey hooked me up with politically. But it does get to the Patterson point that "people often expess opinions at odds with the ideological label they attatch to themselves."
Check out the match game here: http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/candidate-match-game.htm
3 comments:
Once again, we see that surveys are not gospel truth. Mr. Wolak's conservative friend was shown as being closest ideologically to Dennis Kucinich. Mr. Kucinich is not only extremely left wing (universal healthcare NOW, abandon all international trade agreements NOW), but self-righteous to boot. After royally blowing it as mayor of Cleveland, he ran for the House with the slogan "Because he was right." As a result, Mr. Kucinich has a very narrow fan base right now. Even if an arbitrary survey shows I an more aligned with, say, Fred Thompson, I still would prefer voting for Rudy Giuliani. Americans should not base their votes on who a polling service says they should vote for. They should vote for whoever they feel is right, even if it is inconsistent with their ideology.
Eleven questions are not enough to help you decide who you are most aligned with. Also, in some cases, I had to select an answer I disliked the least. However, I do think taking the poll was interesting. I was closest with Senator Joe Biden. It makes me want to research his campaign more and see what his platform is really like.
The race for president should be decided on issues and not a popularity contest. But in reality, people are going to vote for the person they think they can trust to lead the country, which is not totally a bad thing. Every citizen will have to ask his or herself some questions before they vote that goes beyond the issues. Questions like how will this person be observed overseas? Which candidate is going to surround his or her self with qualified people? Will the new president appoint a head of FEMA whose highest qualification includes being the Commissioner of the International Arabian Horse Association? (That worked out great, right?)
The bottom line is anything that will get voters to learn about the issues is a good thing.
I would agree with both comments stated above--like chapter 7 had mentioned, there is always room for error when taking polls and surveys and in no way can they ever define a human thought. However--I would also like to comment that there definitely is a pressure in choosing what party to support and whether or not that supports your belief. Many times if you're brought up in a family that is strictly one party, going against them seems almost impossible because you are so firmly ingrained with a certain philosophy. I see this a lot with minority parents--if you're minority you're automatically democrat--no second thought about it...if you go against that you are some capitalistic pig that doesn't support anyone but himself.
Post a Comment