Cosmetic Politics

When my little boy asked me who I wanted to win the elections and become the next Prime Minister of New York I thought to myself, ah, he’s on my level.

And it occurred to me that I’m really not sure who I’d like to see become the next American President.  I was originally rooting for Anybody But Bush.  I even bought the hat.  But he doesn’t seem to be in the running.

Anyway, the first thing I tend to consider when thinking about politicians is did they support the Iraq invasion but I can’t very well base my judgements on that one factor alone albeit an important one. 

So let’s see . . . who would I vote for based on my own political leanings and my minimal knowledge and perceptions of the candidates?  Well these are the thoughts that I think when I see the candidates-in-campaign.

Hillary Clinton: wife of former President, Bill Clinton who still hasn’t quite shaken off the blow-job legacy but the jokes have well and truly had their day.  She has a good face in that I don’t feel the need to vomit when I see her on TV.  She’s a good talker – eloquent and quick but she is a bit condescending at times and often comes across as a bossy teacher.  I think I once read that she has some kind of universal-health-care-for all policy which sounds like something I’d support but I don’t know the details.  She seems to care about climate change but much of it sounds like rhetoric.  She would be the first female President which is a big plus for gender progressiveness.  And women are natural peace-makers but here, Margaret Thatcher comes to mind.  And Hillary did support the Iraq war.  6/10

Obama Barack: would be the first black (mixed race?) President, again good for social progressiveness.  He is an attractive man with a distinguished look about him for such a youngster.  His wife looks like Condoleeza Rice which is not good.  I hear people say he’s not experienced enough but he does talk about hope – a lot.  Like Hillary, he talks the talk about climate change but he does sound more genuine about it.  He was against the Iraq war. 7/10

John McCain: son of Steve Martin and Marlon Brando (well he looks like a mix of both).  I know the least about this Senator.  In contrast to Obama’s young age, some say that McCain is too old.  Poor guy is already doomed now anyway since George Bush annointed endorsed his candidacy.  I watched the press call and looked away in pain when Bush gave his cringeworthy little jig.  I cringed even more when Bush opened his mouth to speak of his support for McCain who looked very uncomfortable about it all.  After my extensive and indepth Google research, I discovered that McCain says he will make CO2 emissions reductions mandatory which is very brave for a Republican.  I also found out that the McCain Oven Chip company has an environmental policy too which is all very good.  He voted in favour of the Iraq war so a big negative there.  Ultimately though, he is a Republican and for me, there’s just no getting round that.  All four of his points are gained from his strong stance on the environment policy alone. 4/10

So, have I missed anyone? 

I must add that Obama and Hillary get an extra point for being democrats although that will probably come to mean very little once they’re in office.  And of course there’s the progressive factor in their favour but really, we can’t vote for someone just on the basis of – and for the sake of – progressivism alone.  

You see, I mostly base my judgements on apolitical, uninformed and really rather cosmetic factors that in an ideal world should not be important.  Am I typical of the average voter? I hope not!


5 responses to this post.

  1. I’m afraid, Earthpal, matters in the world will go on as they have so far, no matter who will be the next President. Too many circumstances will prevent her/him to act properly in her/his mandate, among them:

    1. The sums of money they have received from interested parties to fund their campaigns will condition their attitude towards existing problems.

    2. The Iraq war will be among their problems for a very long time yet, oil being a too pricey element to let it fall in the hands of their legal owners.

    3. The economic difficulties the US is going through.

    4. Countries that have been so far unconditional subservient of the US are starting to shake off its influence in earnest.

    5. Bush’s legacy of hatred the world over not an easy problem to get rid of.

    So, my position in this connection is that of a patient man who waits to see how things will develop in the future, but my hopes are not, really, that they will improve.

    Too much damage has been done.


  2. I sent a comment here and I checked it was registered, but now it’s gone away…disappeared. Trolls at work?


  3. I’m not sure what happened to your vanishing comment Jose. I checked my spam box and it hasn’t turned up there.

    Yes, I agree with you Jose. Nothing much will change. The American administration will continue to be influenced by big business . . . people will continue to suffer from the legacy that Bush has left. But you’re right – people are becoming less afraid to stand up to the States.


  4. Don’t forget good ol’ Ralph Nader’s running again. He won’t win of course, but you might want to check out his chances of syphoning votes away from Clinton or Obama, the way he did for Al Gore in 2000.


  5. Well there you go. That just confirms my ignorance.

    Thanks for the info. I think I would give him a grand 9/10. But yes, his campaign is likely to compromise the chances for the two Dem candidates.


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: