``..It is high time that we PJs realize that most people in fact vote on their gut senses of what kinds of persons the candidates are. If this were not so, there is no way in hell that Bush would be even with Kerry in the horse race...'' Jon Johanning
-----------
My problem is that I don't know anybody who voted for Bush.
But from this kind of perspective, Bush II seems like an `ordinary guy' only because he has no style, isn't bright, and tells stupid jokes. He's only personal appeal as far as I can see is that he isn't fat and has a nice looking wife. His daughters are a complete zero. But they're twenty, so who cares. And that about sums it up.
Even if I put myself into the plain and unadorned character of what I imagine is the `ordinary guy' view of things, Bush comes up as a liar. He flip-flops and lies so much, that he reminds me of a sleazy salesman. First it's this, then it's that, then it's some other thing. So which is it?
If Bush is a zero, that leaves Kerry. Kerry is turning into a zero too. Kerry thought Vietnam was a bad idea after he went there. Okay. A lot of people thought Vietnam was a bad idea, after awhile. So does Kerry think Iraq is a bad idea? Well, I don't know. Kerry doesn't really say.
What else is there to talk about? Education. Where is Kerry on education? I don't know. Is he going to make it easier for my regular American kid to get into state college and get through? Who knows.
Okay jobs. What about jobs? There are good jobs and bad jobs. Most people I know all have bad jobs. What's a bad job? Low pay, boring work, no real career, nothing to look forward to, and no future. In other words, just a job. What is Kerry going to do about that? As far as I can tell, nothing. What's a good job? Good pay, work that means something, has some promise of a future. Nobody running for office has said a thing about that kind of job.
What about healthcare? I need glasses and some dental work. Does my job's health plan cover those? Hell no. So what do I get for the coverage? Nothing as far as I can see. So now what? Let's say my kid broke his wrist or forearm horsing around with his friends and it cost a couple of thousand dollars with the deductible and uncovered items , plus the hospital and some doctor group threatened to turn us over to a collection agency for the late co-pay. It would take months to sort that. What's Kerry going to do about healthcare? Nothing as far as I can tell.
What about taxes? I pay plenty and get nothing for it. What has the federal government ever put back in my community? The post office? I thought Nixon kicked them out thirty years ago. I can't think of a thing the feds do, except fancy jet fighters, welfare and social security. I got my SS statement a few years ago and according to the fed estimate I'll get about a third of what I earn. Big deal. The feds seemed to have screwed up the public utility system so my gas and electric bills went through the roof a few years ago and that was about it.
>From this perspective, I am not sure there is any reason to vote for
either one of these fuckers.
Wojteck writes:
``Stated differently, what matters is now what a political candidate says, but how he/she says it and how he/she presents him/herself while saying it. A candidate that projects a right combination of "status clues" is likely to be perceived more competent and thus win the election...''
In my plain american mind set, I understand this as job interview skills. Okay. I get it.
Now, I watched both Kerry and Bush. Last night Bush did some of those weird expression things with his face. He seemed to make his speech as a speech. In other words, it didn't mean a thing to him. If I was watching him for a job interview, I wouldn't like him. He came off a little like a con-man with an attitude streak. He projected what I call an `entitlement' attitude, or arrogance mixed with a combative nature. In terms of prospective job applicants that reads like this. He would lie about his background and skills. If he made a mistake he wouldn't admit it and would get angry if called on it. That's bad news, because he couldn't be trusted and managed in a supportive way. He is the kind of guy who needs to be watched on the job, which is a real headache.
I watched Kerry's speech and he seemed to mean what he said and did seem to care. He was combative, but then he was the challenger. Kerry has a bit of that `holier than thou' thing going on. But he seems to know how to turn that on and off, which is good. Bush can't turn his problems on and off, which is bad.
The result of this penetrating analysis says that Kerry has a very slight lead based only on his personality traits. Of course this assumes that most US'ers are not authoritarian assholes at heart---an increasingly doubtful assumption.
My deepest psychological conclusion about Wojtek's sociological analysis is Wojtek has the hots for Kerry's wife.
This conclusion is based on the psychological concept of a displaced projection from Wojtek in the references to `arty', `smart', `urbane'. Kerry exhibits either none of these, or a very limited range of these qualities, while his wife exhibits them all in profusion. As a consequence of this penetrating psychological insight, I would say that Wojtek will vote for Kerry so he can watch Teresa Heinz more on tv. I also have to admit in a disclaimer, that I would much rather watch Teresa than the ice cold Laura Bush.
CG