We are approaching a November election that promises to be a
contentious one at best and a Republican win - predicted by some, but certainly
not all prognosticators - in both houses of Congress. Since it is not a presidential election, the turnout is
questionable. That will, in turn affect the results dramatically. One thing is certain; these elections are
always unpredictable.
The question we are always supposed to ask ourselves is,
"Are you better off now than you were (X) years ago?" Usually, X equals 4, but that is the number
of years between presidential elections, not congressional cycles. In this election, the number has to be
either 2 or 6, depending on whether you are voting for a representative or a
senator. Confusing, isn't it?
There is a whole new field of public relations called
Perception Management in which the object is to convince people that a lie - or
at least a half-truth - is really completely true. Some have nicknamed it
"spin control" while others refer to it as KSI, or "keep saying
it." The idea is the same in both
cases; a lie, told often enough and supported by cleverly crafted
"facts" can be foisted on a lazy or ignorant public.,
A lot of the political campaign advertising we will see and
hear and read over the next month is going to be extremely negative, because
the spin masters have determined that it is easier to broadcast innuendo and
half-truth about the opposing candidate than it is to publish
the over inflated, or non-existent record for their candidate. Negative ads will outnumber positive ads by over two-to-one.
When it comes right down to it, the only true gauge of the
incumbent politician's record is how it has affected you during his term in
office. Hence, the question... Are you better off now than you were before?
The answer isn't always that easy to get to for some. We tend to pay too much attention to those
so-call "facts" and base our own personal answer on the reported
affects on others. Many callers to
radio talk shows and writers to newspaper opinion columns cite vague instances
they've heard or read about to express their own situation. If challenged to give specifics, more often
than not they point to someone else's experience, not theirs. I call the phenomenon, "I'm okay, but you should see
what happened to..." syndrome.
It isn't fair to judge, or form an opinion based on hearsay
and rumor. Certainly you have some
personal experience that can be used to support your view. If not, if you live in a total vacuum, free
of any effects from what the politicians do or legislate, then you have no
basis for either praise or complaint.
Please vote for the incumbent in all cases. But, if you have been either positively or negatively affected,
use your own experience, not that of some unknown entity or person to cast your
vote.
Now that we've cleared that up, let me propose the question
for real... Are YOU better off today
than you were 2 years ago or 6 years ago because of the influence and actions
of the incumbent representative or senator who is up for re-election?
If you can answer that question honestly and personally, you
are ready to go to the polls on November 6th.
If not, you better begin to concentrate and formulate your response. Make your vote count for something you truly believe in..
