THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA is often inconsistent in covering stories. They gave us wall-to-wall coverage when George W. Bush's National Guard service came under scrutiny, but suddenly made themselves scarce when over two hundred Vietnam veterans pointed out hole after hole in John Kerry's service narrative. When Rush Limbaugh ran into legal problems surrounding his addiction to painkillers, we heard breathless updates on subpoenas and court orders, but when Eason Jordan revealed his predilection to slandering the U.S. military, again the press pulled a disappearing act.
This column reeks of liberal news bias, and the paragraph above highlights the two-party systems downfall into its proverbial cat-and-mouse game.
The supposed statistics on whom people vote for has been in the past measured by 25 percent of the vote going to the Democrats, 25 percent going to the Republicans, and 50 percent is still the middle or undecided voter. I'm sure those numbers are not accurate but are nonetheless being used as a guide.
The undecided voter is so because they are confused by the mass amount of every day indictments one party bestowes onto the other. The voter, let alone the undecided voter, has cynicism for politics in general. There can be much good to politics, obviously, but the truth is people have cynicism because politics built up its dirty reputation up by itself by lying, corruption, making empty promises, and so on. As a customer service slogan at a grocery store once said in so many words, 'It takes a long time to build up a customers trust with excellent customer service, but just a second to lose it with poor service.' This is evident in peoples mistrust of politicians.
It is why I propose for now on all politics alike mute topics where both party's candidates appear to have questionable military pasts. These back-and-forth attacks do nothing for the undecided voter because they just push themselves further into oblivion. Rather, it wouldn't be so bad if in fact Democrats/Republicans are so much better on most issues than the other, then they should be promoting those issues they have a rock solid foundation to fall back on. Even better, both party's, if they are so much better than the other, won't be afraid to highlight their pros and cons. Because, after all, if they are that much better than the opposing, they will have no confidence issues because their pros will heavily outweigh the cons. I mean, it's all about campaigning to the undecided voter, right?
The unfortunate reality is neither movement has any intentions of giving even one iota to the other party. It would mean they are acknowledging the other has a point -- and we wouldn't want to do that! Politicans and bloggers alike want to win and only win. They want nearly as much as the two opposing sides want at a planning commission. (Minnesota Republican Governor Tim Pawlenty should be applauded for suggesting his capital members, for once, get something accomplished by going into a "lock down" at a military barracks because he recognises with two sides there needs to be some middle agreement.) The people in general need to hear the truth: Politics isn't about whose "better." It is about whose "less worse." The choice is yours, but the cynical undecided voter (and for good reason) doesn't want to hear the "We're the good guys, they're the bad guys!" Most want to make an informed choice in voting for the lesser of two corruptions, and then move back into whatever their life interests are, particularly like raising a family. The rest of the yo-yo political spiel just confuses them and makes them more of an undecided voter.