Man...

[seawasp]

... I will be so relieved when today is over and the Electioneering stops. Oh, there's still undoubtedly going to be venom and bile spewed by whichever side loses, but I hope it will lose some of the poisonous intensity that has characterized things in the past several months. Even when I *agree* with some of the positions I still find myself absolutely repelled by the hostility and hatred that radiates from many of those expressing them. This has been true in RL, on LJ, and on Usenet; the expression of political opinion has just seemed to reach a new high (or low) of furious, loathing-filled ranting that I hope will dissipate following the conclusion of this circus of stupidity.

This election HAS caused me to decide that, unless I actually *LIKE* a given candidate (as opposed to "just dislike him less") I will vote against whoever's incumbent. No repeat terms for ANYONE unless I actually have reason to like them.

Comments

[shsilver.livejournal.com]

Very interesting stand on incumbents and one to which I will have to give thought in the future.

It took a while...

[seawasp]

... but I decided that what it boiled down to was that even Hitler needed more than 4 years to completely screw up Germany, so even if I'm voting for Satan Incarnate, if each of them only gets one term, he can't do TOO much damage to the country as a whole.

[meril.livejournal.com]

You know, that's one of the reasons why I took my break from LJ. Too much polarity and squabbling. (You're still on my reading list because I assumed you were safe. And I was right.)

I'm safe?

[seawasp]

Now I have that scene from "Marathon Man" stuck in my head.

"Is it safe?"

[meril.livejournal.com]

XD

Yeah, I'm not really sure if it's safe to come out. My flist has been inundated by politics. I'm posting book reviews to my blog to compensate...

[rezendi.livejournal.com]

I will be so relieved

You and me both.

[eacole72.livejournal.com]

I will vote against whoever's incumbent. No repeat terms for ANYONE

That's my thought, too. After the mess the state legislature in Kansas made of the budget (and everything else they touched) this year, none of them need to be back where they can continue to cause the rest of us extreme pain.

alternative viewpoints

[heracolyte.livejournal.com]

I like your idea, no repeat terms.

I also kindof like another idea of trying to vote to have more than one party in power. You need people to tell you that you are wrong, even if they are wrong. If there are people who can block your decisions, it forces you to think more -- a sort of peer review process.

I believe the process -- like more open government and healthy debate -- is essential to well functioning government more so than who is actually in power.

Now having people in power who do not like clarity in govt and peer review (look at what all of the editors of Scientific American have to say), will stifle that even further.

A single party with a solid hold of all branches of govt is not a good thing. They'll end up drinking their own kool aid.