Mon 28 Oct, 2002 09:16 pm
I can not wait until election day -- simply because I am sick and tired of all those annoying ads. We have as many as 4 playing one right after the other. Some have been appearing for weeks and weeks; the vast majority are strictly negative; some make promises that I can not imagine anyone in his right mind would believe (i.e. one candidate for governor here in NY is offering a free college education for every kid with a 'B' average while still cutting taxes). Rather than making me want to vote for one particular candidate or the other, they are simply making me numb. Down with political ads!!!!!
Gee, that sounds better than here in Brazil.
Here there is "political hour" when all TV and radio stations are required to broadcast ads for every candidate.
I don't watch TV (though I do watch the shows on my computer occasionally) or listen to radio but that's not all they do.
They also plaster the entire city with ads. Every telephone pole has layers of ads and banners strung between them.
But that's not all! They also pay people to stuff your mailbox full of ads. Since the distributors are usually teenagers who can't wait to get rid of the ads they are supposed to distribute you will probably find a wab of ads in your mailbox from one candidate.
What one household is supposed to do with 50 ads is anyone's guess but that's not the worst part. The worst is that the wind will carry some and make the city look like a garbage can.
This is all quite irritating for me as I can't vote in Brazil anyway (it's that stupid "you have to be Brazilian to vote in Brazil rule ;-).
After the elections (the president was just elected on Sunday) you have to put up with honking cars and such. The drivers are screaming and yelling and waving banners.
In short, I'd not mind US campaigns right about now.
I've got to disagree, just on principle, Bandylu. The information is essential, and you don't expect us all to actually read, do you? Okay, maybe the information is missing and I should stay out of this since I still don't own a television, but that's my idea. Tasteless too, I'm sure, but when has anyone had any luck legislating good taste.
The bigger problem, as I see it, is television announcing winners in national contests, based on no more than exit polls. On this, I can see no way it can be curtailed- serious first amendment issues, after all.
If, in fact, the commercials were informative I might agree, roger. But I have rarely seen an ad that is truly informative. What I do see is an ad which accuses the other guy of such and such, followed a few days later by the other guy refuting the first ad and calling the first guy a liar which is then followed by the first guy refuting the other guy, ad naseum.
The problem is, I'm afraid, that many people get their entire opinion about the candidates strictly from tv ads (which are usually exposed in other media as anywhere from 'stretching the truth' to out and out lies).
As for tv crowning the victor too soon, I live for the times when they are wrong. It gives me great pleasure.
bandylu2- I am totally disgusted by the gubanatorial election in my state, Florida. I keep getting mailings from Jeb Bush, the incumbent- I've gotten at least a dozen. There is nothing positive in his print or TV campaign- he only uses scare tactics to knock the contender, McBride. Higher taxes, less services to seniors- he pulls out all the stops, to frighten the hell out of people. I think that he is scared out of his wits that he might lose, and that there certainly would be ramifications for his brother in 2004.
McBride, the opponent, is doing the same thing. With less money to burn,
he is not as obvious, but the similarities in tactics are there.
It looks like I am going to follow my husband's concept of politics. "Whoever is in, out, before they can get too entrenched, and steal too much!"
I suppose I did say information, but you know I didn't mean it. I meant we have to protect the right to get the information out, even if they abuse it.
Politicians and Salesmen. I don't like them either, especially when the first job of a politician is to get re-elected, which it seems to be.
Phoenix -- I believe that's why our founding fathers set up the Senate so that only 1/3 is elected each time, making sure there are some around who know how the whole process is supposed to work.
roger -- I'm with you on the salesmen and the politicians, too. Any other professions you'd like to do away with????
Hang all the bookkeepers and accountants. Oops! Forget that till I am able to retire.
This is like the best day on Abuzz, isn't it? Which was probably the night you posted 10 reasons to hate fishing. Comment on one discussion, answer on another, and get back to the first just in time to see what you'd stirred up.
Bandylu2- Did you see the piece on "60 Minutes" about Strom Thurmond?
He is FINALLY stepping down at the ripe old age of 100. Now THAT was entrenched!
Looks like we're getting rid of the 100 year old and bringing in the 78 year old and the 74 year old. Hurray for youth!
This is pretty neat, roger, isn't it. Lots of great folks here makes for lots and lots of fun.
The personal attacks started immediately here in California that it looks like an day in the life of Abuzz! If the issue is one of ethics, everyone I know is aware of all politicians having a serious problem in that area. So why bother? If it's true and not like the false accusation made by those who brag they run charitable organizations (which is actually an anti-abortion group -- like that's going to improve the quality of life for everyone), I can see where it falls within freedom of speech. If it's not true, just like the National Enquirer, they should be sued for slander.
Hang on, I've got a candidate we can ALL believe in (this will be posted on TFH on Election Day):
Ah...BOW WOW! I suppose someone will find out Lassie have him a BJ and you know he'll lie about it! By that I mean, lay down an play dead.
I've seen stories about dogs who were summoned for jury duty; and I believe somewhere there is one registered to vote (I seem to remember that his human got in a bit of trouble over that one); makes a lot of sense to me that a doggie might as well run for office. Can't be any worse (and an argument could be made that it could be better)than some of those currently running. Loyal, dependable, and probably much smarter than his human counterparts. Go, Pooch!
Would they run a rough campaign? Rough! Rough! Rough!
The author of this thread has this HUMAN VOICE:
"Down with political ads!!!!!
Though this author is not visible in this forum I uphold this