There is a primary election this Tuesday in Nebraska. A broad field of candidates will be narrowed down to one candidate from each party - most importantly, the Democrats and the Republicans. Nebraska is a historically red state, so there are about three times as many Republican candidates as there are Democratic candidates. And there is nothing wrong with that. But since there are so many candidates, there are also a lot of campaign commercials.
I personally have nothing against the idea of candidates making commercials and airing them to try to convince voters to vote for them. That's part of the whole process. But anyone who watches TV around election time knows that there are a number of what have been called negative attack ads made by special interest groups. And sometimes, there are three or four of these commercials right after each other, seemingly in this order:
"Candidate A has a terrible record. Vote for Candidate B instead."
"Candidate B has a terrible record. Vote for Candidate C instead."
"Candidate C has a terrible record. Vote for Candidate A instead."
And so on and so forth. And these commercials are aired ad nauseum until the election when, thankfully, they stop. Until the general election.
But then there's what the candidates say they will do if they are elected. It's always the same things - cut taxes and spending, vote pro-gun (or pro-life, or pro-family, etc...) and show Washington what Nebraska is all about. Every candidate seems to say the exact same thing.
The exact.
Same.
Thing.
To be sure, acknowledging that there are problems is a good thing. You would have no chance as a candidate if your platform was the status quo. But when I have five different candidates saying the same thing, who am I supposed to pick? Or when each of the special interest groups say that their candidate will do the same thing as every other candidate, why should I even cast my vote?
Well, at this point, the special interest groups making these ads will turn to the opener for their commercials. They will dig up something that an opposing candidate did, maybe years ago, and use that to show why you should vote for their candidate. What's even better is when the special interest groups will accuse the other candidates of ad hominem arguments, which is really just an ad hominem and a straw man argument rolled up into one. No one actually gets into what they will do if they are elected.
(And since I've talked about a couple of logical fallacies, I'm going to direct you to this website: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ so that I don't have to explain what these are. But you'll be able to see that there are a number other logical fallacies being committed if you carefully look at these ads. Tu quoque, appeals to authority, a false dichotomy or black-or-white fallacies, and so on. Moving on...)
But what is a voter to do? I've been focused on my academics for the past several weeks, and so have been kind of ignorant of the fact that there is a primary in a few days. How can I form an informed opinion about dozens of candidates that may or may not represent any or all of my views in a few days? I don't really know which candidates on the Republican side, which I am still technically a part of, I actually want to vote for.
One of the biggest selling points that they all have is that they will fight the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, which I actually think is a necessary piece of legislation - or at least part of a better worldview than the status quo. This is an opinion formed based on the experience of someone in my family who would have needed some of the protections and regulations built into the law - especially prohibiting discrimination based on pre-existing conditions and being unemployed.
But on the other hand, they do share some of the same social values that I have - they are against abortion and support traditional marriage between one man and one woman. They all claim to be a member of a church of some flavor of Christianity, and they paint themselves as important, successful people that are still completely normal people like you and me (even if they make significantly more money because, let's face it, those are really the only people who can afford to run for anything greater than state legislature). If those were the only issues at stake, I would want to vote for some of them. But they aren't. Generally, it seems like I agree that something needs to be done, but I disagree on what should be done. If that makes any sense at all.
So I am honestly at a bit of a loss. I need to do a lot of research into where their values lie, and see if there really is any difference between any of the primary candidates. And then decide if I actually want to vote for any of them.
But what I do know is this: after I cast my votes on Tuesday, I am going to the courthouse on Wednesday to change my party registration to independent because I can't stand either side when it comes to every issue. I need to be able to at least say to myself, "I am not officially aligned with either side. I am not officially supporting the fullness of either position."
There are good things coming from both sides of the aisle in Washington. There are strong conservative values that protect our rights and there are strong liberal values that make sure no one gets screwed over unnecessarily. But what both sides need to realize is that the other side is not trying to overthrow the other side. Nothing is going to get done if every politician sticks to only their party's position. And that is why I'm changing my party registration to Independent on Wednesday.
No comments:
Post a Comment