Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 6 of total 6 in this topic |
TradIsGood
Trad climber
Gunks end of country
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Jul 6, 2006 - 10:18pm PT
|
Periodically we elect a government official, typically on a ballot with a candidate from each of the two major parties, and maybe a couple options representing some particular (peculiar?) interest.
One party is designated right, conservative, neocon, repugnican or whatever, and the other is left, liberal, etc.
This labelling seems to be based on a sort of one dimensional political spectrum. For the moment, let's assume that this simplistic model has some value. (aside, most people seem to be more comfortable with one dimension - black - white, good, bad, rich, poor, right, wrong, etc.)
Since a candidate typically needs to garner a plurality (occasionally a majority) of the votes to win, his campaign strategically attempts to position him to try to stretch just barely across the center. So he has a solid left or right supporting campaign contributing base, but he attempts to wiggle just enough across the middle to avoid losing the base.
Perhaps this strategy is part of an intelligent design, or perhaps it evolved randomly - who knows?
Consider now an alternative strategy. Candidate X decides to go for a central position stretching 25.5% "left" and 25.5% "right". Is this a viable strategy? Of course, he could go for a non-central and try for the same breadth? Where should he go?
Now let's think tactically.
Should the candidate attempt to educate the public on his thinking? His goals? His plan? Vision? Or should he rather spend most of his time picking apart any plan espoused by his opponent? Use capital letter words L, RR, NC, etc.?
Does the public really want to think hard enough to understand the problem and the proposed solution (assuming that the candidate is actually sincere enough to have one)?
Finally, would it make more sense to simply evolve a position by "leaking" out positions, and polling the public response to those "leaks"? Can periodic polling and subtle, or not so subtle, position shifts snag the plurality needed? OK, you have the 3% margin of error problem, so maybe he has to try for position x plus or minus 26.5%.
What do you think?
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Life is generally good enough for both rich and poor in the US that the majority of the public can't be bothered to follow politics more than very, very superficially.
That's why sound bites, lip service, adverstising and poll managed issue positioning is enough to fool the public into voting for candidates that don't serve them but mostly serve the money that pays for the elections and the media.
If things go downhilll, folks will pay more attention and the picture might shift.
Psychology and Marketing have now become sophisticated enough that they are scientifically used to manipulate us in quantifiable amounts.
Stress on the socio-political ecosystem will change the balance of our "nature" Nobodys know how, because the entrenched power will play it's cards to retain it's privilege.
Peace
Karl
|
|
the Fet
climber
Earth
|
|
Check with Karl Rove, I'm sure he's analyzed all scenarios.
It would be nice if a politician could just make decisions based on his/her ideals (and taking the public's views into account), but unfortuneatly they probably wouldn't get elected. There is a whole bunch of manipulation going on, but at this point being honest and straightforward doesn't stand a chance against mudslinging and distortion.
|
|
G_Gnome
Social climber
Tendonitis City
|
|
"It would be nice if a politician could just make decisions based on his/her ideals (and taking the public's views into account), but unfortuneatly they probably wouldn't get elected. There is a whole bunch of manipulation going on, but at this point being honest and straightforward doesn't stand a chance against mudslinging and distortion."
You have got to be kidding right?! Politicians don't care what the public thinks, they spin whatever they do so that the public doesn't care. Why do you think there is such an emphasis on public 'safety' at present? It's strictly to keep the people from thinking about real issues and so that the politicians can constrain the public's right to know even more. Scared people are stupid people.
|
|
Voltzwgn
Trad climber
Sac CA
|
|
I always thought a politician was supposed to be representing the people in his district or area he was elected to represent. So if that's the case his personal views should not be as important as his ability to poll his constituants and represent them and their ideas.
|
|
Ouch!
climber
|
|
Too Late. Too Late. Elvis has left the Republic. We slept through the song.
|
|
| Messages 1 - 6 of total 6 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!