I think it's simply a matter of who you like...as a person

[OneGrassRoot]

We choose and support candidates with the same emotional approach as potential mates.

We often don't know why we're attracted to people, we simply are. Sometimes it's an obvious character trait that draws us to them, be it a candidate or a mate. Sometimes it's something much more shallow or seemingly trivial, though we probably wouldn't admit it. But it really doesn't matter. Once we're attracted to someone, we're more likely to continue to see their strengths and turn a blind eye to weaknesses, or at least try to explain them and defend them to the hilt.

Of course, when it leads to marriage, for most people after a few years the reality sets in and we are more open to seeing the flaws - we either accept them or not. However,within the first few years, even if we see the flaws, we're not likely to tell others we see them for that would be admitting you were naive or blinded or something that makes us look weak or stupid.

It struck me today that this analogy fits the political process and the candidate selection.

Sure, candidate positions and platforms play a big part in the selection, but I honestly think it comes down to emotionality. A candidate can represent many of your interests, but if he/she doesn't have "it" - whatever the elusive "it" factor is for you personally - you probably won't be passionate about his/her candidacy. And everyone's "it" factor requirement is different, just as we all are attracted to potential mates for different reasons.

A shitload of people wanted to have a beer with B*sh. They LIKED him. Plain and simple. They didn't DISLIKE him by 2004 even if they disagreed with his actions; and they certainly wouldn't admit it, just as you don't admit you made a mistake in choosing your partner so soon into the marriage. Until unassailable proof comes about that flies in the face of the very reason why YOU liked this person to begin with, you'll probably continue to like him/her, even if you don't agree with them.

Because most who liked him did so because they felt he was a straight-shooter, many of them are no longer supporting him. Indeed, they no longer like him. Because even some of his supporters can't deny he has lied repeatedly. And it's enough time after the "honeymoon" stage that they can admit it without seeming TOO stupid (so they think...lol).

Without knowing much at all about him, I disliked B*sh from the very beginning. Vehemently. I just did. I liked Bill Clinton from the start - didn't care for some of his actions or policies, but I still like him as a person, so it would take a lot for me to get upset with his actions. I like Edwards the most (I like others, but I LIKE him the most...his manner and his personality and style of interaction appeals to me personally). Because I like him and resonate with him the most, while I will try to remain skeptical and aware, I admittedly will be more apt to give him a free ride on minor things that I don't care for or don't agree with. No one's perfect. People feel this way about other candidates, and that's cool. That candidate has the "it" factor for them.

In summary, politics aside...literally...I think this is a popularity contest based on our own individual "it" factor requirements. We can ram a candidate's previous votes, statements, etc., down each others' throats trying to convince the other person why their candidate isn't THE ONE (just as friends try to convince you not to marry him/her), of course at the same time touting the benefits of supporting THEIR candidate as being THE ONE.

I honestly don't think political positions and history are the most important factor. The "it" factor is. And I'm not speaking of the media's "it" factor, I'm talking about each of our individual ones. We rip on B*sh supporters for electing him because they like him and want to have a beer with him, but on a certain level, I believe that's how we all are choosing, we simply support that choice by touting their positions and plans and qualifications.

I'm fairly certain our intuitive and intellectual abilities to pick THE ONE are more sound than past or present B*sh supporters. I believe so. I sure as shit hope so.



;-)

[BlueJazz]

1. MMM...Don't know... I base my choice on Health Care and No War.

...and Women's Rights.

[OneGrassRoot]

2. I understand...

but isn't there some basic element about the candidate that makes you simply like them? There are many candidates who support many of the same issues, but some people like so-and-so's way of expressing it and others like someone else's approach.

I'm simply saying that, fundamentally, after all is said and done, our unwaivering support is based on a genuine affection for a candidate. We're not going to support someone who goes against issues we believe in; we wouldn't be attracted to them in the first place. But if they get our attention with the issues, then it's a matter of the "it" factor coming into play and keeping our attention.

[BlueJazz]

3. Oh..I'm sure personality comes into play and I am a victim of it...

..myself.

I do TRY to not let my feelings over-ride the facts but alas...I sometimes succumb to Emotions.
(Let me tell you about some Girl-friends I've had....Naw...it would just piss you off!) :) :)

[aquart]

4. Is this fifth grade? Is this the local bar?

Are you choosing a candidate on the basis of who you want to share a coke or have a beer with?

Could that be less intelligent or more shallow?

I'm choosing the person who will walk thru fire for this nation and maybe die in the attempt. Liking has nothing to do with it.

[OneGrassRoot]

5. Wow, you're really on a roll tonight... n/t

[tularetom]

6. It better friggin not be

Where else in the fuckin world do they elect a chief executive because he seems like somebody they'd "like to have a beer with". For the record i don't want to have a goddamn beer with any of these people I just want someone to be president who has a decent fuckin grasp of the huuuge problems we face in this country and in the world as a whole. This isn't fuckin junior high it really almost is a matter of life and death.

If we really are that shallow we are in a heap of trouble folks.

[OneGrassRoot]

7. Holy shit, people can be so uptight here...

I know we're dealing with life and death. I KNOW that.

My observation (just my one, individual observation) is that maybe, just maybe human emotion (rather than the almighty intellect a certain subset latches onto as the only aspect of humanity that matters) plays a bigger role than we'd like to admit. And it isn't necessarily a bad thing if we genuinely like people for admirable reasons. Absolutely how they stand on the issues is pivotal. I'm not dismissing that. THAT would be stupid.

I'm not saying people are going to vote for Edwards because they think he's hot; they may agree with stance on things AND think he's hot, and that's okay in my book, but I'd prefer they say they're voting for him because they agree with his stance and they simply like the guy. The same for any of the other candidates....whoever you choose, chances are you resonate with their personality.

I think we're being blind if we act like their stance on issues is all we care about. Not everybody certainly, but a great deal more people than would like to admit it. Again, I don't think it's a bad thing.

Guess I screwed up the analogy with the whole Bush-beer thing.

Is there anyone here supporting someone whose personality they can't stand or rubs them the wrong way?