We avoid overt political talk here at English Champion, but since the party conventions will dominate the media cycle and pop culture environment for the rest of the month, perhaps a piece of advice is in order if you intend to listen to some of the speeches.
Politicians from both sides of the aisle will constantly espouse their love for this country and their goals of helping particular groups of people. And perhaps they are both telling the truth. But what they will tell you from their respective convention stages is with a simpler goal in mind. In fact, their aim of helping you is actually WAY down their list of priorities. They might say they will do x and y for you, but that's not entirely true, is often not actually possible, and is likely simply a means to achieving a more pressing concern.
When considering whom to vote for this election season, and when you watch the conventions, you should be thinking of three things:
1. This candidate cares most importantly about getting elected.
2. This candidate then cares about getting re-elected.
3. This candidate then cares about getting their friends elected.
Trust me, your personal concerns are not even part of their thinking until those first three things have been accomplished--number 47 sounds about right to me. And even then, that might be a stretch. It doesn't matter which political party you see on stage, these three rules are consistent across all ideologies.
This is not to say that politicians are bad people. Like everyone else, I have a few that I find interesting and worthy of such a leadership role. And I will have to make my voting decisions for this fall just like everyone else. But when you first consider the short list above of a candidate's priorities, you can become more discerning, and a smarter voter. "Is she just saying that to win my vote?" "Will he ever actually do what he's saying?" "Is this person just saying that because it sounds nice and people will cheer?" Yes, who knows, and yes. And there's a simple test: if that candidate were to lose the election, would he/she still work to enact that policy? For example, if Donald Trump loses, would he personally donate the several billion dollars required to build a wall along the southern border? If Hillary Clinton were to lose, would she use her vast personal wealth to pay for poor students to go to college or offer her personal time to go teach Pre-K? The answer to those questions is a clear no. Therefore, getting elected is automatically more important than actually doing any of those tasks.
When you think about politics as the rhetorical game candidates play rather than actually advancing a philosophical agenda, it becomes easier to avoid the emotional back and forth that often accompanies elections. They all care about themselves first. And that's not necessarily an indictment--in fact, it's human nature. But let's not be naive in believing these politicians are so altruistic that your personal life is their top priority. It's just not.
That's why I avoid any politician who wants to "do" anything for me. I'm waiting for the candidate who steps on the stage and says, "Don't physically hurt each other. Don't steal from each other. Otherwise, you're on your own. You figure it out." Mic drop. That dude (or dudette) would be my hero.
I know this all sounds quite cynical, but it should also be helpful when it comes time to make your personal voting decision. When you realize what politicians' real aims are, everything else becomes clearer. Both conventions could turn out to be a huge trainwreck, so watch at your own risk. Remember to be a smart viewer, and you just might survive.
Politicians from both sides of the aisle will constantly espouse their love for this country and their goals of helping particular groups of people. And perhaps they are both telling the truth. But what they will tell you from their respective convention stages is with a simpler goal in mind. In fact, their aim of helping you is actually WAY down their list of priorities. They might say they will do x and y for you, but that's not entirely true, is often not actually possible, and is likely simply a means to achieving a more pressing concern.
When considering whom to vote for this election season, and when you watch the conventions, you should be thinking of three things:
1. This candidate cares most importantly about getting elected.
2. This candidate then cares about getting re-elected.
3. This candidate then cares about getting their friends elected.
Trust me, your personal concerns are not even part of their thinking until those first three things have been accomplished--number 47 sounds about right to me. And even then, that might be a stretch. It doesn't matter which political party you see on stage, these three rules are consistent across all ideologies.
This is not to say that politicians are bad people. Like everyone else, I have a few that I find interesting and worthy of such a leadership role. And I will have to make my voting decisions for this fall just like everyone else. But when you first consider the short list above of a candidate's priorities, you can become more discerning, and a smarter voter. "Is she just saying that to win my vote?" "Will he ever actually do what he's saying?" "Is this person just saying that because it sounds nice and people will cheer?" Yes, who knows, and yes. And there's a simple test: if that candidate were to lose the election, would he/she still work to enact that policy? For example, if Donald Trump loses, would he personally donate the several billion dollars required to build a wall along the southern border? If Hillary Clinton were to lose, would she use her vast personal wealth to pay for poor students to go to college or offer her personal time to go teach Pre-K? The answer to those questions is a clear no. Therefore, getting elected is automatically more important than actually doing any of those tasks.
When you think about politics as the rhetorical game candidates play rather than actually advancing a philosophical agenda, it becomes easier to avoid the emotional back and forth that often accompanies elections. They all care about themselves first. And that's not necessarily an indictment--in fact, it's human nature. But let's not be naive in believing these politicians are so altruistic that your personal life is their top priority. It's just not.
That's why I avoid any politician who wants to "do" anything for me. I'm waiting for the candidate who steps on the stage and says, "Don't physically hurt each other. Don't steal from each other. Otherwise, you're on your own. You figure it out." Mic drop. That dude (or dudette) would be my hero.
I know this all sounds quite cynical, but it should also be helpful when it comes time to make your personal voting decision. When you realize what politicians' real aims are, everything else becomes clearer. Both conventions could turn out to be a huge trainwreck, so watch at your own risk. Remember to be a smart viewer, and you just might survive.