Hunh?

[AdminAssistant]

Hi everyone,

My first post over here in Fratching land...woohoo!

Okay, so...this is really bothering me, and it's such a minor thing...BUT it kinda pisses me off. And, like most evil in the world, it's a result of Facebook.

When I got my master's, one of my classmates was someone who is the complete opposite of me, politically (among other things). She's very vocal about her opinions, so am I. That's fine.

As we all know, the conventions are starting, and the atmosphere is very politically charged. I was checking my friends' updates on Facebook, and a lot of the statuses are "Go this candidate!" "Go that candidate!" Um, Yay! I'm all for that, whomever you choose to vote for. It's positive energy.

However, CM (classmate's) status for the past week has been, "Other candidate is such an IDIOT!". "Only Communists would vote for other candidate." And tonight, "You have to register with the Socialist party to vote for Candidate" (No offense to Socialists/Communists on the boards. Whatever milks your guernsey as far as I'm concerned)

But, the fact that she's not only outright attacking my candidate of choice - but also insulting ME and anyone else who plans to vote for him.

Or am I being way too sensitive? Has the grad school related sleep deprivation already kicked in?

grrrrrr

[MadMike]

I know what you're saying. A few weeks ago, I found myself behind a vehicle that had a McCain sticker, and another one that said, "If you love Osama, Vote for Obama!"

OK, the childish picking on him for his name notwithstanding, did he just imply that because I don't want to vote for someone who is basically a Bush clone, that I support the terrorists? I know I shouldn't take things so personally, but that one seriously pissed me off.

[Boozy]

From my viewpoint, this election is being run on both sides with a bit more class than the 2004 campaign. I'm entirely open to being proven wrong here, because in Canada we only see the campaign ads when they're newsworthy. So I don't have the full picture. But the 2004 campaign just seemed nastier from my perspective.

There are a few attack ads, but if you think that's bad, think about what Karl Rove would have done to a black opponent with a foreign-born father whose name rhymes with Osama. That Paris Hilton celebrity ad is almost cute in it's innocence compared to what Rove would have done.

I think people are so used to confrontational and nasty politics that they aren't taking their cues from the candidates anymore. If their candidate of choice doesn't get them riled up enough, they can turn to other media figures. Shock-jocks and PAC's are making their own slogans and bumper stickers.

It happens on both sides, too. There are Democratic supporters who have decided it's okay to hate Republicans and subject them to verbal abuse. These people make the party look bad.

[Sylvia727]

I have to agree with Boozy. The official party lines have been much more civilized. But many citizens think that political elections are like spectator sports- you want your team to win, to win by a lot, and to utterly crush the opposing team. And they'll think that way regardless of who's actually running.

In general, I ignore them the same way I ignore every other variety of stupid I encounter on a daily basis. On a particular level, with my friends, I let them know upfront that if they want to argue politics with me, they had better do it intellectually. I'm not to afraid to challenge statements like "Mr. X is a commie!" with a detailed explanation of communism and Marx vs. Castro vs. Mr. X. The idiots quickly figure out that it's no fun spouting off inane insults around me.

[Arcade Man D]

It happens on both sides, too. There are Democratic supporters who have decided it's okay to hate Republicans and subject them to verbal abuse. These people make the party look bad.

To be fair, Karl Rove actually did start it against Gore and Kerry. The last two elections, aside from calling GW an idiot, most Democratic citizens were, well, "tame" almost.

I guess this year they figured if the hard-line Republicans/conservatives were going to fight dirty and continue the "Democrats/liberals are immoral Godless heathens" crap, they'd just stop actually following the New Testament advice of "turn the other cheek". </rant about the sheer hypocrisy in politics you see on all sides.>

[Depot Denizen]

My problem is that the huge OMFG issues - once again - are abortion and gay marriage. Out of *all* the problems and issues to think about, hardline conservatives choose those two? Out of education, the economy, environment, social justice...

I really just do not understand it. A women's right to choose whether or not she wants to have a baby, and whether or not two people regardless of sex can be legally bound to each other in a ceremony.

I'm saddened by the fact that both parties feel the need to attack each other's character and personality rather than focus on what their policies may be. Attack the arguement, not the man. A basic logical fallacy, perpetrated by our would-be leader.

[MystyGlyttyr]

By the time we've gotten this far into it, haven't most people already pretty much made up their minds anyway? As soon as it got down to Obama and Hilary in the Democratic primary, I knew who I was going to vote for, and I have to imagine most other people are aware enough to know that much by now, too.

Or is that me being too optimistic in the awareness of the people around me?

[AdminAssistant]

I think most people have made up their minds.

Honestly, I haven't seen much in the way of abortion or gay rights in McCain's campaign. Possibly because Obama does not support gay marriage (*grumble*) and McCain himself said he would consider a pro-choice VP. The two big issues I'm seeing are the war and the economy. Now, should McCain choose a super-conservative Republican like Huckabee, then I'm sure that they'll start pushing that issue.

IMHO, most of the 'Christian Conservatives' that would be won over by a pro-life, anti-gay marriage candidate aren't going to vote Obama anyway.