2008 Woodie Awards
Indecision leaves voters in a bind
Nicole Dellasanta
Issue date: 10/31/04 Section: Feature-ELECTION 2004
- Page 1 of 2 next >
So you don't like either presidential candidate. George Bush reminds you too much of a trained chimpanzee, and John Kerry has his head stuck so far up a multi-million dollar bottle of ketchup that he can't decide where he stands on certain issues.
Now what? You don't want a president who stutters and blinks too much when speaking with other nations, and you don't want a president who drones on in a language too complex for your already-filled mind. You also don't want a president from a political party you've never heard of, either. The Green Party? The Libertarians? The Constitution Party? You've heard the name Nader floating around, but he may as well be the latest contestant on "Fear Factor" for all you know of him. Why bother voting for a candidate who has less of chance winning the election than William Hung has of winning "American Idol"?
So that settles it: you just won't vote. Problem solved.
No, the problem isn't solved. The only way the problem of voter indecision, or worse, voter apathy, is solved is for you to make a decision. It is impossible for you to disagree with everything each candidate stands for, because each candidate holds very different views on the same topic. Unless you're entirely neutral on every topic relevant to America today, there is some aspect of each candidate's party that you agree with. Are you pro-choice or pro-life? In favor of strict or lenient gun control? Want to send more troops or withdraw the brave soldiers already in Iraq?
If these topics are too complex or abstract for you, look at each candidate's policies on domestic issues. Where do they stand in education? Are you going to have to pay full tuition for graduate school, and are your younger siblings going to have enough textbooks in their classrooms, or will either candidate offer more funding for schools?
When it comes to personalities and first impressions, your affinity for either candidate may get a little tricky. While in a democracy the idea that appearances aren't sufficient grounds on which to base your opinion of someone, the fact that Kerry looks like he just emerged from the grave and Bush looks like he just came from a night on the town with his college buddies may sway some voters in either direction.
Now what? You don't want a president who stutters and blinks too much when speaking with other nations, and you don't want a president who drones on in a language too complex for your already-filled mind. You also don't want a president from a political party you've never heard of, either. The Green Party? The Libertarians? The Constitution Party? You've heard the name Nader floating around, but he may as well be the latest contestant on "Fear Factor" for all you know of him. Why bother voting for a candidate who has less of chance winning the election than William Hung has of winning "American Idol"?
So that settles it: you just won't vote. Problem solved.
No, the problem isn't solved. The only way the problem of voter indecision, or worse, voter apathy, is solved is for you to make a decision. It is impossible for you to disagree with everything each candidate stands for, because each candidate holds very different views on the same topic. Unless you're entirely neutral on every topic relevant to America today, there is some aspect of each candidate's party that you agree with. Are you pro-choice or pro-life? In favor of strict or lenient gun control? Want to send more troops or withdraw the brave soldiers already in Iraq?
If these topics are too complex or abstract for you, look at each candidate's policies on domestic issues. Where do they stand in education? Are you going to have to pay full tuition for graduate school, and are your younger siblings going to have enough textbooks in their classrooms, or will either candidate offer more funding for schools?
When it comes to personalities and first impressions, your affinity for either candidate may get a little tricky. While in a democracy the idea that appearances aren't sufficient grounds on which to base your opinion of someone, the fact that Kerry looks like he just emerged from the grave and Bush looks like he just came from a night on the town with his college buddies may sway some voters in either direction.