I sincerely will that your perspective on the political situation proves to be correct. Oh that I could feel sure of it but I can't.
You wrote "it is the will of the people that wins elections." It may sound obtuse of me but I'm not so sure about that. Of course, it is individuals who indicate a preference for a particular candidate, (though often the selection is really one of ideology or Party & they may know little or nothing about the candidate.)
The problem I have with your statement is that I suspect that although it seems an accurate one on the surface and is almost certainly what was intended for democracy, there is a whole context surrounding elections and the allocation of an individual vote. I think few would argue that money is a significant element in relation not only to who stands for election but in how well they can 'sell' their desirability to the voters.
Status and power are also significant because there are those who can influence broadcasters and publishers and institutions which benefits their visibility as well as their portrayal.
Added to those factors, there is the ignorance, diffidence, lack of interest, legacy views or simplistic understanding of much of the population.
I'm sure that there are many other factors that I have forgotten or missed or failed to recognise but even those I've enumerated suggest to me that it may be an over-statement, at best, to believe that "it is the will of the people that wins elections."
I understand your perspective but as someone who sees way too much news, by choice, I decided to try and maintain some optimism. The court decisions this week are bad news as Trump appointees blatantly get involved in politics. The upcoming trial about the coverup of hush money payments now gets more important because the SCOTUS immunity stalling will not affect that trial because the violations predate his presidency. A tiny ray of hope that it chips away at his deteriorating reputation. M
I hope you're right.
I sincerely will that your perspective on the political situation proves to be correct. Oh that I could feel sure of it but I can't.
You wrote "it is the will of the people that wins elections." It may sound obtuse of me but I'm not so sure about that. Of course, it is individuals who indicate a preference for a particular candidate, (though often the selection is really one of ideology or Party & they may know little or nothing about the candidate.)
The problem I have with your statement is that I suspect that although it seems an accurate one on the surface and is almost certainly what was intended for democracy, there is a whole context surrounding elections and the allocation of an individual vote. I think few would argue that money is a significant element in relation not only to who stands for election but in how well they can 'sell' their desirability to the voters.
Status and power are also significant because there are those who can influence broadcasters and publishers and institutions which benefits their visibility as well as their portrayal.
Added to those factors, there is the ignorance, diffidence, lack of interest, legacy views or simplistic understanding of much of the population.
I'm sure that there are many other factors that I have forgotten or missed or failed to recognise but even those I've enumerated suggest to me that it may be an over-statement, at best, to believe that "it is the will of the people that wins elections."
Take care. Stay safe. ☮️
I understand your perspective but as someone who sees way too much news, by choice, I decided to try and maintain some optimism. The court decisions this week are bad news as Trump appointees blatantly get involved in politics. The upcoming trial about the coverup of hush money payments now gets more important because the SCOTUS immunity stalling will not affect that trial because the violations predate his presidency. A tiny ray of hope that it chips away at his deteriorating reputation. M
Thanks for this balanced, hopeful comment. I need all the hope I can get right now.