 |
|
If he's right, they want form over substance...
Posted on: July 28, 2016 at 08:27:05 CT
JeffB MU
Posts:
72403
Member For:
21.45 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
1) They want a unifier—not a divider.
Unity is better than division, to be sure, but I would rather have division that uniting behind Hitler or any other person who had evil &/or dangerous policies
2) ‘The system is rigged. The process is broken.’
3) They crave more choices.
Can't really argue with these preferences. Of course we did have more choices... in the primaries. The voters are the ones who selected these two.
4) Character is more important than policy.
I'm very leery on this one. Would some cantankerous or lecherous drunk with great policies be worse than some candidate who had good character but whose policies would likely lead to WWIII? Not in my book
5) Candor counts—a lot.
To an extent, but it depends upon the context.
Hiding what one truly believes and what one is planning on doing is deception and a bad thing, but I don't think expounding at length on any and every topic, much less shooting from the hip is necessary or even advisable.
6) They want to dream again.
That might be a wish, but is a very ill-advised goal for choosing a candidate. Voting for someone because they can paint a beautiful dream would be foolish in the extreme if their actual policies would create a nightmare.
7) What will be done on Day One?
I guess that's ok with me, at least to an extent. But all I really want to know is their true priorities. If they follow through on their promises... that I am in agreement with... I'm happy even if they do it on Day Two, or Twenty, or perhaps even in Year Two, depending upon the issue(s), timing and opportunities available.
8) They are digital.
Big deal. Should that really be a vetting criteria for voters? Vote for the candidate who is digital, even if they want to re-institute slavery or kill babies or attack other countries for no legitimate reason? That's just stupidity and a ridiculous set of priorities.
Unity is better than division, to be sure, but I would rather have division that uniting behind Hitler or any other person who had evil &/or dangerous policies
2) ‘The system is rigged. The process is broken.’
3) They crave more choices.
Can't really argue with these preferences. Of course we did have more choices... in the primaries. The voters are the ones who selected these two.
4) Character is more important than policy.
I'm very leery on this one. Would some cantankerous or lecherous drunk with great policies be worse than some candidate who had good character but whose policies would likely lead to WWIII? Not in my book
5) Candor counts—a lot.
To an extent, but it depends upon the context.
Hiding what one truly believes and what one is planning on doing is deception and a bad thing, but I don't think expounding at length on any and every topic, much less shooting from the hip is necessary or even advisable.
6) They want to dream again.
That might be a wish, but is a very ill-advised goal for choosing a candidate. Voting for someone because they can paint a beautiful dream would be foolish in the extreme if their actual policies would create a nightmare.
7) What will be done on Day One?
I guess that's ok with me, at least to an extent. But all I really want to know is their true priorities. If they follow through on their promises... that I am in agreement with... I'm happy even if they do it on Day Two, or Twenty, or perhaps even in Year Two, depending upon the issue(s), timing and opportunities available.
8) They are digital.
Big deal. Should that really be a vetting criteria for voters? Vote for the candidate who is digital, even if they want to re-institute slavery or kill babies or attack other countries for no legitimate reason? That's just stupidity and a ridiculous set of priorities.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
If he's right, they want form over substance... - JeffB MU - 7/28 08:27:05