Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404
Even though you only say what I tell you,I have to agree with you. I also think two things are different since 1994. The first is right wing talk radio and pundit movement really came into their own. I also think its in the media best interests for elections to be divided and dirty. it means lots of ad buys.
|
Well you're basically saying the same thing as me....I said the deep division started in 1994 (you could argue it started in 1992 with Pat Buchanan's culture war convention speech...but I digress)
In 1994 when the republicans took control of congress, that's when this all started. I'm not blaming them entirely or anything, both sides are guilty.....but it seems to me that is when it became better to not solve a problem so that you could use it to hit your opponent over the head in the next election.
That's also the congress that gerrymandered the congressional districts to the point where almost every seat is safe. The seat is safe, but not necessarily the congressman, because they can still be challenged in the primary.......so it's in a representative's best interest to cater to the far wing of his own party rather than to serve all of his constituents.
Gone are the Bob Dole's and Pat Moynihans, the Tip O'neill's and Jack Kemp's, they've all been replaced with hardcore ideologues who are more interested in blaming the other side for the problem than they are in solving the problem.
Case in point, the latest legislation to hit the floor. Hey guys can you save us from a great depression?
Only if the other side doesn't try to take credit for the deal or blame my side for the problem. We'd rather have great depression #2 than lose in November.
So like I was saying, the debates are pointless because minds are already made up. If the republican nominee was a dancing bear from the circus, that bear would still get 45% of the vote. If the democratic nominee was a transsexual panda, it would get at least 45% of the vote.
Pretty sad state of affairs IMO.