As if I didn't have enough politics to deal with

Between City/Library negotiations and my own constant maneuvering towards Queen of the World status, I haven't had much time for the presidential hooplah. Plus they've been talking about and running for the '08 election since approximately 1974 so if I'd paid any notice I'm sure I would be burned out on it by now. My sister Jenny raises a good point though--since these people have been canvassing nonstop for years now, who is doing their actual jobs? Wise words, o sister mine.

I imagine I'll have to start paying attention soon. I played one of those candidate match games a little while back and came up with someone I'd never ever heard of. So, yeah. Best get in the know.

I'm not voting for Mitt Romney, though, in case anyone was wondering. Yes, the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics were very smooth and well done--thank the heavens above, since I was living in the area at the time and was sure it was going to be two weeks of a BYU football game day times 10 million right out my front door. So I thank Mitt for that. But I doubt I'll agree with his politics, and he doesn't seem capable of keeping his story straight.

So I'm worried that it's going to end up being a bit like this:

(Image from Cafepress--thanks to Cicada and Squirrel Boy)

Plus, I already know how it's going to go. Years from now I'll be in Europe, sunning myself somewhere lovely while a bronzed youth brings me slushy fruit drinks. As soon as people recognize my accent they'll start talking to me how much they hate our President. Because this is what always happens. They will either hold me personally responsible, or they will smile benevolently and tell me that it's okay--they're sure I didn't vote for him/her. I will think back on this moment and say, "Hey. I had to pick someone."


Yankee Girl said... [reply]

I've done a few of these candidate matching games and the thing that has struck me is that my results always mix the parties. For example, this one told me to vote for Romney, Obama, Giuliani in that order. I think it just goes to show that despite how much the two parties hate each other, they really aren't that different.

Miss Hass said... [reply]

I agree with you on the Mittster. I feel like I'm supposed to vote for him because he's Mormon. But if his religion really isn't going to affect his politics, then that shouldn't matter. Right?

Nemesis said... [reply]

Yankee girl, I think I was told to vote for McCain, Hilary, and Obama. Which, random.

Hass, yeah. I would for sure support him if he were my bishop, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with his professional choices. Plus if Mitt completely lies about what he believes during interviews, like with the whole, "I don't think God has talked to anybody since Moses" comment last month, then I have even less time for him, regardless of what his political views are.

Nemesis said... [reply]

I mean that if Mitt Romney were my bishop I would support him in his bishop role. Not that it would mean I had to vote for him as president. Just so we're clear.

Scully said... [reply]

Nem, my aunt's boss was on the OC durring the run up to the 2002 Winter Olympics and she has a couple of stories that would make you not want to vote for Mitt more. Also, I know a lot of Mormons and I wouldn't want most of them as President, so I think that using that as a sole determining factor is ridiculous. Especially since Sen. Reid was the worst Sunday School teacher I ever had.

abby said... [reply]

Actually that bumper sticker is my mantra for election 2008. I really dislike Hillary. I don't particularly like any republican candidate, but that doesn't really matter since a Democrat will win. The candidate I did like was Bill Richardson and he's out of the race, but he never had a change to begin with. If I could vote for Stephen Colbert, I would.

Anonymous said... [reply]

so HELP me if i hear one more close minded un-informed molly mormon tell me she is ' like totally going to vote for Romney, because, I mean, he's mormon, so he's gotta be good, right? and like whom else am I going to trust?"... so I paraphrased, but you all get my point. It REALLY bothers me when people choose to be ignorant and not even look at their options of who they will vote for to be their president. PS Nemesis, this is not to say that you are ignorant because, hi, I don't even know you in person, but I am assured you are the least ignorant person I know. OH OH OH AND it bothers me when people don't even pay attention at all to local politics. I actually had a roommate who didn't even know what the voucher referendum was about... i had no words for her...

kristen said... [reply]

While I have a few issues with Mitt (like some of the things he's said in interviews, such as the one you mentioned), I like him as a candidate. After all, we shouldn't be voting based on religion, right? And I'm sure we could find dirt on all of the candidates; oh wait, we have! I like his take charge attitude, his leadership, and of course his conservative views. Am I voting for him? Haven't decided.

Hillary scares the crap out of me.

And it bugs that outsiders dish our country and president, but that's another can of worms. I'm sure I could find 20 things wrong with someone's country for every 1 they find wrong with ours.

Anonymous said... [reply]

Why is everyone making a big deal about not voting for Mitt when your reasons for doing so have nothing to do with his platform. Sure, voting for someone just because you share the same religion isn't right but all the reasons not to vote for Mitt on this entry seem just as petty. I'm not putting a plug for Mitt because this obviously applies to all the candidates too.

Maybe I'm wrong and presidential elections really are just like high school student body popularity contests.

I guess the real question is how does anyone know who's for real?

Anonymous said... [reply]

Canadian here, I just find it crazy how huge your leadership campaigns are. Across the border, politics is nowhere near as big! The amount of media is incredible. I'd definitely be sick of it after a year of it. You still have to wait til November, for pete's sake.
Not but what Canadians should be a little more interested in their own government.

Nemesis said... [reply]

Scully, yeah. I mean, the only thing that the LDS label might mean is that the person in question shares your religious beliefs. But there is still a range of political views within the church membership--being LDS doesn't dictate that you must be a conservative Republican. And since there are more members of the church outside the US than in it, I think it's safe to say that there is room for a lot of variety there, and that it's okay for there to be differences.

Point: Don't vote for someone just because he's the same religion you are. After all, I bet you've met lots of idiots at church.

Abby, I don't even know who Bill Richardson is, but I'm sorry for your sake. :-)

Anon, no worries. I full own up to being quite ignorant about many, many things. But I am going to remedy that before it comes time to vote in November--I promise.

Nemesis said... [reply]

Wow, everyone commented all of a sudden while I was answering other comments. Such fun!

Kristen, thank you for being a VofR by pointing out that we should be choosing people based on their track record and how it fits with what's important to us. About Hillary, I have no advice for you there . . .

Anon, I don't think my reasons for not being a Mitt fan are particularly petty. I bring him up because a lot of people seem to assume that he has the "Mormon vote" and that of course all the country's Mormons will vote for him without even stopping to think about it. I am stopping to think and I don't agree with all of his policies. I also don't particularly admire the way he presents himself.

Anon, I hardly ever hear coverage of Canadian politics. I might find yours more interesting than ours.

Jon Boy said... [reply]

I'm not voting for Mitt, and it has almost everything to do with his policies; I only dislike his beliefs when he gets all flip-floppy and weaselly about them in what I perceive is an effort to downplay Mormonism's weirdness (example). (I'm also a tiny bit scared by his hair.)

Jon Boy said... [reply]

Actually, rather than saying I don't like his beliefs, I should've said that it concerns me when he appears to be willing to say whatever he thinks his audience wants to hear. I simply don't know when to trust him. But then again, he is a politician.

Anonymous said... [reply]

One idea is to thrust yourself ahead 4 to 8 years and try to imagine who will do the least damage! As cooldad pointed out to me last night, some of the good candidates simply run out of money to keep campaigning while the (less good) millionaires can afford to keep going. That's my 2-cents worth. But in the end I will vote republican, even though I would love two endings, and then get to pick the one I want to watch.


BEFore said... [reply]

Based on the way the country is going, the way congress/the senate are passing popularity laws without actually thinking about what they are doing, etc -- and his extremely consistent voting record...

I'm yet another Ron Paul supporter. Sadly, I suspect he won't win the Republican nomination (that's a stacked deck anyway) -- but I feel better supporting someone I like at this point. Last presidential election left me with a "we couldn't do better than THESE TWO?!" feeling.

Anonymous said... [reply]

People that are choosing Romney just because he's Mormon (like the Molly's) are just as bad as NOT choosing him just because he's Mormon. I know that's not the case with you because you said you have other reasons for not liking him. However, I find a lot of Mormons fall into one category or the other. ("Mitt will be GREAT because he's Mormon!" vs. "Whatever. I don't have to choose him just cuz he's Mormon. I can think for myself.")

Also, I've come across several people who proclaim their fear/hatred/overall disdain for Hillary without being able to give one solid reason why. I'm not a Hillary supporter myself and again, I'm not saying that this is the case with those who have posted here. But it is something to think about.

kristen said... [reply]

Anon--one word about Hillary: Socialism.

Nemesis said... [reply]

Jon boy, Word.

Hello sweet mommy. I think you should vote Democrat just to freak dad out. In fact, maybe that's what I'll do, even though since I'm in Utah my vote won't actually count for anything.

Before, I'm sorry I didn't know who Ron Paul was that one time. You were very gracious about it.

Anon, you make an excellent point. And although I can't really answer on the Hillary question, it looks like Kristen can .

Kristeee said... [reply]

When I lived in Austria ('03-'04)I got so many comments about Bush and how awful he was, etc. The funny part was how all these little old ladies were so adamant that Hillary Clinton would be such a great president. You know, since they know how America should be run and by whom.

I don't think we're going to have any good candidates. Your bumper sticker was oh so appropriate.

Science Teacher Mommy said... [reply]

Plantboy said it best to me about a week ago, "If Mitt wasn't a Mormon, would you even be considering him at all?" Well, since I disagree in every way with his politics, probably not.

Before he even made the Senate I read a really great and very thorough article about Barack Obama that gave me a lot of confidence in his character. I have yet to see him do anything that is inconsistent and he seems to understand where regular people are coming from and America's role in the world. (Parents from two cultures, spent part of his growing up years in another country, not much money; even as an attorney, his professional experience reflected a genuine desire to help people and not just litigate for huge corporations.)

But at the same time, he isn't just a talking head. He is one of the smartest folks in the mix and I think he has a message and aura of optimism that is a refreshing change from the bash fest Mitt started with the Republicans. On the other had, I like McCain for the fact that he is moderate, and isn't afraid to BE moderate even if it means all of the Iowans are going to vote for somebody else. Unfortunately, if McCain is elected, we will lose one of our progressive-thinking, accomplishing senators.

And Hilary . . . I think it is going to far to use the word "socialism" though she definitely thinks government should have a more expansive role. Truthfully, one of my issues with her is that her election would mean from 1980 until 2012 there would continuously by a Bush or a Clinton in the White House. I don't think this is healthy for our country, at all. The founding fathers would be appalled by the sheer numbers of professional politicians we have. They wanted regular people to come to Washington for a few years and then go back to their lives and give some one else a chance. How does this match the current state of things in any way?

Why does everybody but Mitt get a last name instead of first? Do we feel close to Mitt? In that case, shouldn't he be brother Romney? Or do we just like to say "Mitt." Who names their kid Mitt anyway?

Audra said... [reply]

Is it bad that I just don't want a Mormon president. I don't want to have to put up with the publicity, the news stories, the questions... ugh... I live in the Bible Belt... not fun!

Scully said... [reply]

Science Teacher Mommy, maybe people just like saying "Mitt the Mormon" rather than Romney. Also, have you read Obama's books? I would recommend them if you haven't. Especially the first one, Dreams From My Father.

Anonymous said... [reply]

I agree with science teacher mommy on Obama. He's had my firm support for many months now. :) Go Obama!

Also, I just wanted to share something I've been thinking about Romney's possible presidency. I served a mission in Europe and it was sometimes difficult to get people to talk to us about anything besides American politics. Everyone had an opinion (almost always negative) about Bush and our war in Iraq. Some refused to listen to us because they saw us as agents of the US government. It was quite a battle at times to explain to people that we were representing our church, not our government, and that our church does not take political stances on such issues. If a Mormon should enter the White House, I can only imagine how much harder that battle will become for our poor missionaries. Not only that, but should Romney become tainted with the war/Gitmo/etc. in the eyes of the international community, the church will carry the same stain in the eyes of many people. No, it is absolutely not fair or rational, but I can almost guarantee that is what will happen. I'm not saying this means those of you who like his politics shouldn't vote for him just out of fear of persecution. But it is an interesting thought I just wanted to throw out there.

chosha said... [reply]

Apologies for just commenting on comments. I'm with abby on Colbert, he's awesome. And kristen, the US is a powerful country and your policies and politics affect a lot of people outside your borders. Those impacts can be catastrophic if you guys vote the wrong person in. For that reason, I reserve the right to have an opinion about your country and how it's run, because I'm indirectly affected by it, and often. Trust me, Australia is a middle power, and nothing we do is going to impact on you like your presidential choice can impact on us. Just ask our troops. This comment is not meant as a dis. I just want you to understand that it's not just a matter of America-bashing for the sake of it.

Nemesis said... [reply]

Thanks, Chosha. I was actually thinking the same thing about why the rest of the world cares so much about US politics. Coming from you it's a lot more valid, though!

Science Teacher Mommy said... [reply]

When I lived in Oz (during the Clinton years, so public opinion was a lot more favorable), I also had the impression that people there were in some ways frustrated by the influence that the American government has on their own country's policy. Bush said, "If you aren't with us, you are against us." Those are extremely powerful words coming from the man who is, yes, really, looked at as the leader of the free world. If he passes policy based entirely on what a few embittered, money-grubbing hawks in his administration say then that is just plain scary. I think it will be interesting to see what new president does once they sit down and get the CIA/FBI/Pentagon briefing about what is REALLY going on that cannot be reported. All of the rhetoric about bringing the troops home might come to naught in the face of knowledge that cannot be publicly shared.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...