[Peace-discuss] Inclusive Presidential Debates

[C. G. Estabrook]

The typical discussion in the midst of the 2004 election apparently went as follows:

   POLLSTER: Have you heard anything about George Bush's position on the Kyoto 
Protocol?
   BUSH VOTER: No.
   POLLSTER: Do you think President Bush would support the Kyoto Protocol?
   BUSH VOTER: What's the Kyoto Protocol?
   POLLSTER: It's an international agreement to reduce greenhouse gasses that 
seem to cause climate change.
   BUSH VOTER: Well, that sounds like a good idea, so I'm sure George Bush would 
support it.
   POLLSTER: Why are you sure?
   BUSH VOTER: Because Bush is a good man with good values, so he'd certainly do 
the right thing on a matter like that.
   POLLSTER: So you're sure he'd support the Kyoto Protocol?
   BUSH VOTER: Yes.

A *majority* of people who voted for Bush in 2004 answered like that.  (Some of 
them of course had heard of the Kyoto Protocol.)  --CGE


Jenifer Cartwright wrote:
> Right, no reason for those comfy/uncomfy, settled in or not, televiewing 
> Americans to pay attention to world or national (or local) politics 
> until something immediately affects THEM, and then they might take 
> notice. Yes, Iraqis definitely have more to talk about in coffee houses 
> (for those w/ money enuff living in areas safe enuff to frequent them). 
> Then again, FOOTBALL doesn't actually affect Americans...
> 
>  
> 
> Again, I'd use the word ignorant, rather than stupid. Re the point y're 
> trying to make, polls are a joke. Trust me, most non-voters -- and 
> many voters as well -- haven't the faintest idea where Kyoto is located, 
> let alone what the Kyoto agreement(s) involved.
> 
>  --Jenifer
> 
> 
> --- On *Tue, 7/8/08, C. G. Estabrook /<galliher at uiuc.edu>/* wrote:
> 
>     From: C. G. Estabrook <galliher at uiuc.edu>
>     Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Inclusive Presidential Debates
>     To: jencart13 at yahoo.com
>     Cc: "Walter Pituc" <wpituc2 at gmail.com>, "Peace-discuss List"
>     <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>, "Prairie Greens of East Central
>     Illinois" <prairiegreens-org at lists.chambana.net>
>     Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 10:39 PM
> 
>     Why?  Because they're particularly stupid? Or because they're the object
>     of the 
>     most expensive propaganda campaign in history?
> 
>     There's little doubt that the sophistication of the political discussion in
>     any 
>     coffee shop in Baghdad is conducted at a much more sophisticated level than 
>     similar conversations in US coffee shops, bars, or faculty lounges.
> 
>     Again, why?  Because Americans are dumber? Or because it's literally a
>     matter of 
>     life and death elsewhere, altho' it's not for infantilized Americans?
> 
>     In fact, however, in spire of all these ministrations, the US populace holds 
>     political opinions substantially to the left of the official political parties.
> 
>       If you doubt that, look at the answers that Americans give to pollsters on 
>     issues -- e.g., healthcare, Iraq, the influence of big business, the 
>     responsibility of the government to provide jobs, etc.
> 
>     That's why national candidates have to run on personality, not issues --
>     because 
>     American don't agree with either the Republicans or the Democrats on
>     issues. 
>     (Example: a majority of those who voted for George Bush in 2004 thought that he
> 
>     supported the Kyoto agreement -- because the Kyoto agreement was reasonable,
>     and 
>     Bush was apparently a reasonable man...)  --CGE
> 
> 
>     Jenifer Cartwright wrote:
>     > Carl,
>     > 
>     > I grant you that many/most who are eligible to vote, do not vote in 
>     > national elections (and even more skip the local elections). You believe 
>     > these particular folks are staying home because there are no candidates 
>     > that you and they can truly support, and that they'd be out there if 
>     > there were. I believe they're staying home because they're just 
>     > not interested in politics and haven't a clue what's going on in
>     their 
>     > country or the world, nor are they interested in finding out. Pushed to 
>     > hazard a guess or state an opinion, they'll say something positive
>     about 
>     > the good old US of A. 
>     > 
>     >  --Jenifer
> 
>