[Peace-discuss] Inclusive Presidential Debates

[C. G. Estabrook]

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