Friday, December 17, 2004

Why Kerry lost

I'm getting tired of all the things I'm reading about how Kerry or the DNC or Holywood activists or whoever in the Democratic Party should or shouldn't have done this or that or whatever, and everyone trying to decide who was the most to blame for the whole thing. Now obviously, things could have been done differently because they lost, but let's not overlook the fact that they lost mostly because the voters are a bunch of idiots. I think Kerry must have been lacking something, because anyone with anything to offer should have been able to easily beat the idiot who won in a landslide. But just because Kerry wasn't Superman doesn't mean he wasn't clearly better than W. So let's put the blame where it belongs, on all those morons driving around with W stickers on their cars.

Serously, why would anyone vote for this guy? Ok, I'll give rich people and those in charge in major corporations a pass, because at least they voted for their own self intrests. But if you're a Republican, why would you vote for this guy? I always hear Republicans talking about small government, Bush's administration has no concept of small government. I hear Republicans criticize Democrats for "tax and spend" policies, but how are Bush's "spend and spend" policies better? We will have to pay for that spending at some point. If you're religous and you voted for Bush because of his commitment to his faith, then I would argue that you must not understand what religous preachings are supposed to be about. What would Jesus do??? Well, probably not kill a whole assload of people in the name of Democracy (which I still fail to see any semblance of in Iraq). If you voted for Bush because you think he makes you safer, then you haven't been paying much attention. The War on Terror has pretty much ignored the people responsible for attacking us, allowing them to focus on planning future attacks, while we send Americans over to get killed by other terrorists in the mean time. Also, opposing any 09/11 related investigations or reforms doesn't seem to me to be something that will make us safer.

Anyway, my point is that Bush has the voters fooled, and it's because they're stupid. It's not because of anything Kerry or the DNC did or didn't do. Sure they could have done things differently, but still the blame for the mess our country is in lies on the administration and the sheep who voted for it. It reminds me of all the people who blamed the OJ verdict on the prosecution. Sure the prosecution made mistakes, but they showed pretty clearly what happened, and it's pretty hard to screw up how a guy left a trail of blood from the crime scene to his house. Regardless of any mistakes that the prosecution made in the case, the blame for the ridiculous verdict is on the jury for being idiots. A clever ryhme shouldn't be able to excuse a mountain of irrefutable evidence. Just as the smoke and mirrors the Bush Administration uses to convince people it's on their side shouldn't be able to hide the clear and obvious evidence to the contrary. But, people (apparently) are just stupid.

Posted by


Shakespeare's Sister said...

You seriously crack me up! You're so right, though, and all the ongoing theoretical arguments are just a way of shielding ourselves from that harsh reality. (No one wants to live in a country of idiots, do they?) People are hot on Oliver Willis' Brand Democrat idea (and it is great), simply because - whether they admit it or not - it counters the Brand America campaign that the idiots across this country have been falling for over the past 4 years. It's our Pepsi to Bush's Coke. Yes, the Democrats have VASTLY better ideas for the country, but that doesn't even matter to most people (probably including some Democrats). We just need to make Pepsi a viable option, and it doesn't come down to ideas and theories - it comes down to marketing, because that's all the materialistic, Desperate Housewives-watching American electorate understands. Because they are, as you say, a bunch of idiots.

John Howard said...

Yeah, you're right. It's very sad to me, thought. It used to be, anytime I would think people are mostly stupid, something would happen to restore my faith in them. But after this election, I really don't see anything to lead me to believe that any Bush voters can think for themselves (which is odd because I know Bush voters who otherwise I would consider intelligent, but I honestly cannot reconcile intelligence with a vote for George Bush).

Anyway, you're right, it's about marketing, and I didn't mean to imply that the Democrats don't need to change things in order to win, but just to make sure we understand where the true blame lies.

By the way, let me also be very clear that I would never equate watching Desperate Housewives with a lack of intelligence, because Desperate Housewives is clearly a great show.

Shakespeare's Sister said...

But, see, you're *allowed* to say you like Desperate Housewives, because you'd never stop anyone else from trying to watch it - unlike many of the knob-ends who voted for Bush!

I totally know what you mean about having your faith restored, too. In fact, at AMERICAblog right now, John has a post up that links to a Christian Science Monitor article about the troops' complaints, and how they're increasing. And John makes the point that he doesn't understand, then, why 70% of them voted for Bush! He kind of just throws his hands up and says, "Well, we offered you an alternative, and you didn't take it, so we're done with this being our problem," and I understand the feeling. Very frustrating.

AbandonedHero said...

I have to agree with your post. I personally believe that the followers of Chimpy are nothing more than that. The majority of Republicans don't think for themselves. It's a classic case of Orwellism (If you don't know what I mean, read 1984 by George Orwell). It's stupid how these people can be expected to be informed voters, but they only see one side of the story. Utterly ridiculous.

John Howard said...

I've mentioned several times similarities I see between our current administration and 1984. I think it should have been called 2004.

AbandonedHero said...

I actually ended up reading 1984 for the second time in my English class, and wrote an essay on how 1984 is reminiscent of 2004. Perhaps sometime I'll have to post it on one of my blogs.