Yes, I know. It is a shock that I, who does all kinds of pontificating would say that at some point there is something that makes it almost pointless.
I submit that for all of what we see in the blogs and on radio, television, websites, way too many pollsters, at some point we have to let things play out.
Case in point.
Most of those who would call themselves conservatives and definitely Republicans had been saying for the better part of a year now that it was a lock that Sen. Hilary Clinton (D-NY) would be the Democrat nominee for president. And same people were ready to coronate former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani as the Republican candidate.
A funny thing has happened this election season.
By golly, people actually voted.
And for the Democrats, there was a surprise.
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill) won in Iowa, barely lost in New Hampshire and will quite possibly win a caucus in Nevada this Saturday and a primary in South Carolina the following Saturday.
So much for all our pontification. Although I have said I think Sen. Obama will be the eventual Democrat nominee, we still need to let people vote.
Same for the GOP.
Out of nowhere, Mr. Giuliani changes tactics and decides not to seriously contest any early state. Thus, the GOP divisions are plain as day. The Rev. Mike Huckabee wins in Iowa, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney in Wyoming, Sen. John "F--- You" McCain in New Hampshire and we have to wait to see on Tuesday in Michigan and Saturday in South Carolina.
The point is that there are still people who, in trying to boost the candidate that they are for, still are going to say "If candidate A does not win in B, it is all over". Or, "This candidate polls the worst in the November election against that candidate".
Michael Medved http://michaelmedved.com is doing this in trying to boost his candidate, Sen. "F--- You" McCain. He cites polling data that shows Mr. Romney the worst candidate from the GOP against some Democrat rivals. Of course, this is in January and the election is in November.
Hugh Hewitt http://hughhewitt.com has done a lot to back the candidacy of Mr. Romney, looking for any positives.
But, at the end of the day, it is still up to us, the voters, to make our decisions.
My vote is in no way influenced by polls and the like. I have taken the time to look at all the candidates in the GOP field, since I am a Republican after all, and that is how I have come to the conclusion that Mitt Romney would be the best candidate. And, although not a Democrat, I have looked at there candidates and come to conclude that if I was a Democrat and wanted to win in November, I would vote for Barack Obama.
Now, here is something no one asks.
Do you want a different candidate from your party to run for president?
There is a way to throw a monkey wrench into all of this.
But, back to point.
Because I back Mr. Romney, I hope that I try to educate and inform rather than just bluster. I think that most analysts are lazy. That is why they wanted the Hilary-Rudy contest. Or the Hilary-McCain match up.
That is why certain wins or even second places are dismissed and attempting to influence an already tired electorate to just give in for the least objectionable candidate.
One thing that I have been saying and I think will bear out in all of this is that the American people want someone new on both sides. No more Bush and Clinton. Hence, for the Democrats it is Sen. Obama and to an extent for the Republicans, it is among two, the Rev. Mike and Mr. Romney.
Some pontificators have not caught up on that one yet because then they would have to work and find out why.
And that is the point. We who want to inform and to a lesser effect influence people need to not be lazy. We need to see that there are real trends out there, not just what we want. We need to try to be objective in that aspect of our pontificating and I think that we will move from being seen as nothing but shills and as people really trying to figure things out.
No comments:
Post a Comment