Why are they so boring?

Friday, February 22, 2008 at 10:46 | Posted in Election, Politics, USA | 8 Comments
Tags: ,

I was just watching this clip of last night’s debate between Obama and Clinton where they speak about their differences. Sort of, anyway. Both of them talk for about two minutes without actually saying very much. Sure, both of them deliver a couple of witty remarks about each other but other than that, there is little or no content.

If I had never heard a word about either of them and this clip were the only message from both of them before I would have to make a choice, my choice would probably be not to vote for either of them. I would probably feel the same after watching a random two minute sound bite by McCain, for that matter. This is not politics, this is cheap entertainment.

And not very good entertainment either. Although I was drinking the second cup of my breakfast coffee while watching, I almost fell asleep during Hillary’s two minutes, just to briefly pay attention as she finished and Obama started to talk me back to dozing off. Why are they so boring?

Do Americans want a boring president? Do they want somebody who is readily able to make a bad joke about their opponent rather than addressing the issues? I doubt that they do.

Why then? Why do they seem to be making the best they can to scare off anybody who might be interested in what they actually have to say?

8 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

  1. i find quite boring the US elections from Spainūüė¶

  2. Maybe it’s because they don’t dare? Hillary is so way off now that any wrong sentence will tumble her off her godgiven right to be nominated. No more wrong footsteps from her or her pal Bill?

    Barack? Well, he doesn’t have to, he’ll win anyway.

  3. Actually, TV debates are not the place to seek the candidates’ real message which is why I do normally not watch them. But an awful lot of people do and what is worst, debates like this one are the only message they here from the candidates. Given that, I wonder what it is they base their decision upon.

  4. I agree with Geir — it’s fear that makes U.S. politicians so boring. It’s a huge country, and trying to win over more than 50% of the diverse citizenry makes many presidential candidates strive to sound good without saying anything that could possibly provoke disagreement from any large segment of their target audience.

    And since we have a winner-take-all legislative election system rather than a parliamentary one, all three of the leading candidates have been practicing this kind of politicking for years in the Senate, as well.

    So this is what you get — boooooring (yawn).

  5. […] V√§lill√§ tosin perinteinen kaksipuoluej√§rjestelm√§kin voi olla sangen tyls√§. Juuri nyt eiv√§t Obama ja Clinton uskalla sanoa oikeastaan mit√§√§n, koska pelk√§√§v√§t […]

  6. Democrats are fools. They are as disappointing as ever – even though I prefer Hillary just because she was part of such a relatively successful presidency. Just like the republicans fed on “republican” ignorance, the democrats are proving that riding ignorance works better on their side. That a politician with so little substance has come this far…? It’s a shame Edwards dropped out. At least the last democratic president who was also a Senator had a bunch of experience under his belt.

    On that note… I am so glad that Ralph Nader just entered.

    I don’t think for a minute that Obama can win. The republicans – the heart of which has finally shown its Nixon-teeth (in the Bush Admin.) is vile and disgustingūüėČ. It will rip Obama a new a-hole in the end. Karl Rove and the box of tricks and disgust he learned from Nixon has yet to be even opened. I’m not sure those tricks will work the same on Hillary.

    But, as an expat, I’ve never been good at predictions. I will say this, though: even if Obama or Hillary does win, the vague CHANGE either of them propose will make little difference. American foreign policy will continue on it’s down-trodden path of destruction, exploitation and corruption.

    – Here’s a trivia question for ya. Who was the last democratic president that was also a senator? What happened to him? (Hint: he tried to make a lot of changes during a time of war.)

    -tgs-

  7. Since there are only two incumbent senators so far ever elected as president, one democrat and one republican, it is not too hard to recognize John F Kennedy as the democrat, Warren Harding being the republican.

    I posted a prediction a couple of weeks ago. I have so far no reason to reconsider. In fact, in primaries after that prediction, Obama has gained a considerable number of white female votes. Anyway, the democrat ticket is too close to call but I still say McCain has his hopes in Hillary’s candidacy which would be easier for him to oppose.

  8. As far as winning the presidency, I think the fear that Democrats are feeling about a McCain candidacy are misplaced.

    You wouldn’t know it from reading the paper, but the Democratic primaries have attracted more than fifty percent more participants than the Republican primaries this year. The Democratic party is more participatory, so they probably always draw a few more people, but 50% is a very large advantage. It seems to me that the only way Obama or Clinton could lose the election would be if the Republicans cheat. Which they have done before.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.

%d bloggers like this: