Jackson Free Press

I recently received an intriguing e-mail. It raised some interesting points about this year's presidential election, and I thought I'd share.

Imagine the presidential race if the backgrounds of both candidates, Barack Obama and John McCain, were reversed. No, seriously, indulge me. Think for a moment what it would be like if John McCain were the Harvard graduate and president of its law review. Imagine if he was the rising star of the Republican Party. Imagine if McCain was the great orator who inspired millions with his rousing speeches, generating excitement around the world. What if McCain had the single parent upbringing, but worked hard to not become another statistic? Then think about McCain with only three years of Senate experience and a thin voting record at the capitol. Got a picture? Good.

Now, in the same vein, imagine Obama as the war hero, the Vietnamese prisoner of war. Think of him as the "maverick" who made his name reaching across the aisle to work with Republicans. Imagine if he had been part of the Senate for decades with one presidential run already under his belt. What if Obama had been in the Keating scandal? What if Michelle had been addicted to prescription medication? Think what it be like if Obama had professed his ignorance of the Internet or the economy. Got an image yet? Great!

Now the question I pose to each of you is this: Would the '08 election be similar if this were true, or would it, in fact, be different? My point is simple: Politics is a dirty business. The media coverage can be even dirtier, and public opinion can be downright grimy. It's a "love the one you're with" proposition. Hard facts are usually thrown out the window in favor of spin—no matter who you are or how impartial you think you might be.

If the above scenarios were indeed true, Democrats and Republicans alike would have embraced their nominees just the same. That's why I marvel when I read the blogosphere. It's amazing how some folks chide Obama for his lack of experience but find a way to justify Sarah Palin's. It's strange to see folks champion Obama as the agent of change but try to explain his choice of Joe Biden as his running mate.

Politics is choosing the lesser of two evils, folks—always. Experience is a red herring. Scandals are inevitable. Men and women can change their minds. Either way, we'll get a politician who'll have some pluses and some minuses. The trick is finding the candidate that has the fewest negatives and best inspires a nation to do better. Let the debates continue, but honestly, if someone is a die-hard McCain or Obama supporter, you're probably not going to change their minds—facts notwithstanding.

And that's the truth ... sho-nuff.

Previous Comments

ID

135684

Comment

A supposed new poll says 36% of Voters think the coverage in this year's election is balanced and impartial. While another 36% feel its ''slanted'' for Obama and 8% for McCain..the source...Fox news! .................... ...Now comes the word that both Chris MAtthews and Keith Olberman have been taken off election coverage after Tom Brokaw complained about their fawning over Obama..and honestly...I must say it was a littleuncomfortable to watch at times lol...Sometimes the far left bothers me as much as the far right. and those two at times were in danger of losing credibility...Not unlike Sean Hannity already has with me.

Author

Kamikaze

Date

2008-09-14T10:11:08-06:00

ID

135688

Comment

Politics is choosing the lesser of two evils, folks—always. Experience is a red herring. Scandals are inevitable. Men and women, can change their minds. Either way, we'll get a politician who'll have some pluses and some minuses. The trick is finding the candidate that has the fewest negatives and best inspires a nation to do better. True. There's no such thing as a perfect candidate since there's no such thing as a perfect person.

Author

LatashaWillis

Date

2008-09-14T16:06:58-06:00

ID

135689

Comment

i can agree with L.W. on the no perfect candidate/perfect person...but Kaze, i must protest the simplicity with which you approach your hypothetical. In your scenario, all we consider is the bullet list of biographical information. While it is true that many life stories can lead to the Presidency, it is not true that a life story does a Presidency win. Aside from some fanatical talking heads, few voters are concerned about the lives these men have led when contrasted with their interest in the policy these men represent. Democrats are attacking McCain because his policies mirror those which have been directing our country for the last 8 years.

Author

daniel johnson

Date

2008-09-15T00:56:24-06:00

ID

135690

Comment

Youre correct in a sense Daniel. I can agree in part but honestly...most times...presidential elections for most laypeople mirror those I ran in high School or college. Folks cling to the person who they most readily identify with. The person whose story more closely resembles theirs. .............................. There are the more sophisticated voters like perhaps you and I who look at a person's policy or voting history in the Senate or executive experience. But a huge chuck of Americana either likes McCain because he is a veteran, is white, and is conservative(with 7 house) or they like Palin simply bevcause shes woman, with kids, with family problems, from a small town...Or like Obama because his speeches inspire, or because he's black, or because he's of mixed origin. ... .................. Because of this country's history, I firmly believe if those stories were switched, the faces switched, the race of the candidates switched..Obama would be up by 20 points now and coasting to the white house.

Author

Kamikaze

Date

2008-09-15T07:56:52-06:00

ID

135709

Comment

You certainly have a valid point. i do agree that a majority of Americans seem to be stuck hard and fast to a particular candidate based merely on affinities. i also agree that if Obama had McCain's story he'd be soaring in the polls. When i first read your article i thought that was the point you were going to make but then you diverged and pretty much drew correlations for both parties. On this i disagree (besides my early points) because if McCain had Baracks story but was still stuck with his speaking style, campaign style, and a complete reversal on many of his past key issues, he would most certainly be a joke of a candidate with zero chance of winning. i firmly believe that besides all the important policy shifts an Obama presidency will bring to the power dynamic between large corporations and the average worker/small business owner, an Obama presidency will also help to slowly make the black experience not so foreign to insular whites.

Author

daniel johnson

Date

2008-09-15T19:06:31-06:00

ID

135719

Comment

Absolutely Daniel! What I tried to bring out was the latent hypocrisy that exists in politics. On both sides. Its like having Dallas Cowboy Terrel Owens on your team. You love him when hes on your team but despise him if you have to play against. He's lovable to one set of fans and loathed by others. .............................. Dont get me wrong for one millisecond. Obama's my choice. But I see for instance a lot of talk about Palin here on different threads. The JFP nation seems to be more of an Obama territory(not the publication, but the bloggers). If Palin was Obama's Choice as VP wouldnt be as much attention on her here. Not that that's wrong. Hell, I WANT her to get grilled! But my point is that we're all impartial in a way. We've all chosen sides in this and it shows even in news folk.

Author

Kamikaze

Date

2008-09-16T04:33:04-06:00

ID

135794

Comment

I think you nailed it. The partisans on both sides who will look over every misdeed of their candidate just because of party affiliation and are so blatantly hypocritical about it are what turns off the average voter to politics. The whole business is perceived as corrupt and just like you said, grimy. Who, that does not follow these personalities on a regular basis, can make heads or tails of what kind of people the candidates are through the noise of shrill hyperbole and outright lies slung back and forth. If they are guilty of all they are accused of, we are all screwed no matter who wins. I believe that the noise from either side mainly cancels the other out and that voter in the middle that only pays attention to politics in October and November is left with choosing who he likes best by the candidate's physical appearance, race, gender, which scandal they choose to believe, what party granny always voted for or some other inconsequential, to the business of actually running a government, factor. My wife actually asks me who we are voting for so I get two votes. I take it more seriously than most. Which isn't really saying much with the apathy that is out there, but I do pay attention.

Author

WMartin

Date

2008-09-16T17:01:07-06:00