140413Re: [evol-psych] Re: President candidates being out of touch
- Sep 30, 2012At 10:57 PM 9/30/2012, Don Zimmerman wrote:
>--- In email@example.com, Julienne <julienne@...> wrote:Hi, Don,
> > Of course, people have different perspectives, and will answer the
> > questions from their different visions, - or lack of visions.
> > One issue which has for decades confounded me, is how so many elected
> > leaders, not to mention appointed leaders, tend not to represent what
> > we might consider to be our "best" people - those with the human
> > qualities we would think we would admire and want most to represent
> > us - wisdom, kindness, intelligence, inclusiveness, a broad vision,
> > empathy, Instead we get people wanting to put probes up women's
> > vaginas - run prostitution rings in France, deny climate chsnge, join
> > the banking robbers, steal the vote, grab the cream for the top and
> > leave millions around the world starving, struggling, dying - and
> > these issues are hardly a focus - more a passing nod, as if to
> > acknowledge people know about these issues, and the mere
> > acknowledgement of knowing gives one points without having to
> > actually do anything.
> > By the way, Don - it is also important to look for the Independents
> > on the voting sheets - they can be hidden - and so if one just clicks
> > off one party in a straight vote, one might miss someone running
> > separately from any party for a local judgeship, for example. That
> > can have an immense influence on local politics - even national.
>Yes, those human qualities you mention are certainly needed in
>political leaders at all levels, but getting people who possess them
>in those positions is not easy. Probably in American society there
>are selective factors that concentrate the very best leaders (of the
>type needed in government) in corporations, medicine, law, the
>military, science and engineering, etc. rather than politics. The
>best people are attracted to the best paying jobs, and politics ends
>up with leftovers.
>As to independent voters, true, they cannot be ignored. What we
>should watch out for is supporting an independent when it takes away
>votes from the desired presidential candidate and allows the lesser
>candidate to be elected. The same for the balance of votes in
>congress. For example, even thougn I admire Ralph Nader greatly as a
>consumer advocate, I wish he had stayed out of Pesidental races,
>because he just attracted Democratic votes that normally would have
>gone to Kerry or Obama. I fear that third party and independent
>candidates often are driven more by ego than assessment of what is
>best and realistic in the outcome of the election.
I agree with you. However, what I was talking about is a special
place on the ballot where it is
not a competition for the Congress, but just for judges, I think. I
wish I had written down what was said - but it's a special place on
the ballot for the judges...which we might miss if we just vote
straight party. If we don't find that set of boxes - only those who
know about them will - and there go our votes.
I agree about Nader - The Peter Principle. He also interfered with Al
Gore, as I remember. It's sad -
However, perhaps we don't have our best people as corporate heads,
either. Now, if we could just even
out salaries, then that might change everything.
The selection of a Republican candidate for the presidency of this
globalized and expansive empire is - and I say this seriously - the
greatest competition of idiocy and ignorance that has ever been.
Fidel Castro. January 2012
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>