In 2008, I the media was a wee bit unfair to Hillary
Clinton. It seemed as though the anchormen wanted to make a point of ignoring
her or rolling their eyes at her every time she opened her mouth. Sarah Palin,
on the other hand, nobody ignored. Like Napoleon Dynamite, the audience hung
onto every silly thing she said. If Palin was the election’s Napoleon Dynamite,
then Hillary was the slow-witted fat guy from Office Space (she never did get her piece of cake.)
In this hilarious, wild book, we see that campaign finance
laws aren’t much use, at least not the way they’re enforced. Sure, you can’t
give your favorite Senator $100,000, but you can get 100,000 to give $100 each!
You can have a big fundraiser dinner with lots of celebrities. When all that’s
said and done, the media can, and obviously will, take sides.
Most Americans, according to Dollarocracy, tune into the nationwide news, not the local one. The
nationwides, they have the money for the high powered signals, so whomever has
the money for the advertising get the longest-reaching signal (duh!) and the
average independent candidate might as well forget it. But without this “money-buys-votes”
argument, what does it really boil down to? It’s Democrat versus Republican.
Our country hasn’t had a strong third party in years. Okay, we had the Tea
Party (they sure did a lot better than the Occupy movement), but they fizzled
after the Republicans “borrowed” their ideas. When you only have two parties,
you get monopoly. Americans are used to the Dems v G.O.P and they’re not going
to break the tradition any time soon!
Now here’s an idea. Mitt Romney should’ve (secretly) funded
Hillary Clinton or Jesse Jackson to run as an independent. It would’ve split
the liberal vote in half, and weakened the Democratic party’s chances against
the Republicans. Likewise, the Dems could’ve done the same with the Tea Party
(not that they needed to.)
Maybe in 2016 someone will get wise?
No comments:
Post a Comment