http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=7078359540295363151
The political blog that I viewed was The caucus, you can read the blog if you visit the link above. The blog was about John McCain and Sarah Palin going to the Sylvania 300, NASCAR race, in New Hampshire. Some of the commentators had negative remarks about John McCain, and brought up a good point about his disability of not being able to use a computer because he was tortured as a POW. “McCain is often seen using the tiny keypads on cell phones!
A computer keyboard is much larger,” who is to say McCain can or cannot use a computer? Most of the people found this as an easy way to politically ‘bash’ McCain. Other supporters of McCain defended him and his abilities or disabilities.
This blog was not controlled by a certain blogger, but was just to inform people of what John McCain was doing. His motivation for the visit to the racetrack was in hopes of being able to win New Hampshire‘s votes, as it could be a major state to decide whether he will win or lose the presidency. As proved to be the case in the 2000 election when George W. Bush won by a slender margin, or in the 2004 elections when John Kerry lost by a small number of votes.
With this blog not having a blogger to mediate conversations nobody pointed out the fallacies or flashpoints in the conversation. Therefore the fallacies and flashpoints were not explained. I found a couple of fallacies in the conversation. Many people who brought up McCain’s injury from being a POW during the Vietnam War; are these people educated enough to say he can or cannot use a computer? Another person said “the NASCAR dads are lusting for their new found love, Sarah.”
McCain and Palin were also trying to win over the NASCAR vote, like the “soccer mom” vote. McCain was making his presence known to the public that he would go to these events, hoping to secure more votes. Some of the bloggers were concerned that he would get votes just because he was at the event, and not what he stood for. I can’t believe people would be that shallow to vote for someone just because they have something in common, like their favorite sport.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
It is kind of shallow that people would vote on whether or not they like the same sport. But you can't really go on ANYTHING a political candidate says anymore. That's my thoughts anyway.
I totally agree with TonyG! You definitely cannot believe anything a politician says....in my opinion, all politicians lie in some way, shape, or form.
I concur with your view on political candidates and their false promises, or should I say manipulative, yet effective imaginations and impressions. Wow, the things the American public looks for in candidates today is everything but honesty.
It may be shallow to vote for someone based on a common interest but it is totally plausible. Politicians will get votes however they can, but can you blame them? We as the american voter should step in and say,"Hey! Talk politics." Maybe that is why the electoral college is still in place. Maybe we are not educated enough as a public to carry the full burden of an obsolute popular vote.
Post a Comment