Monk: Dennis, we hardly knew ye

03.10.03

Dennis, we hardly knew ye

Why is it that when I watch the Democrats debate Kucinich seems to get the biggest rounds of applause, but when I watch/read/listen to the news there's nary a word about him?
Someone decided to do something about it.
Everyone I talk to says "Yeah I really like Kucinich but he hasn't got a chance".
Me: "So you're not going to vote for him?'
Them: "Right"
SO- Here's what happens. Nobody's heard of him, but they see him in the debates and they like him. Then they see the news about the debate. The news doesn't talk about him because nobody's heard of him. So everybody thinks "Gee I really thought he had good things to say in the debate. How come they didn't mention him on the news? Must be he hasn't got a chance". So some pollster calls and everyone says "Oh yeah- I'm not voting for Kucinich". He gets low numbers at the polls, so the news doesn't report on him.
This is a great system we have in this country.

Posted by monk at :52

Comments

Of course. Elections in the USA are about political parties, media moments, and popularity. Even if attitudes changed enormously, the very voting system of having to approve only one candidate favors perceived popularity over merit.

If merit were of interest, then the voting system should allow voters to approve or disapprove of each candidate seperately, instead of forcing them to choose a candidate whom they think has a chance. If they could, then the election would actually measure the approval rating of each candidate, instead of the current tyrranical farce we have now, which gets people to vote only for people they think will win, even if they would prefer some brilliant independent, for example.

Posted by: Lactose Free at :08