(no subject)

[derien]

I'm really confused as to how they say that this idiot Scott Brown, the Republican from Massachusetts "rode a wave of populist votes." He got 52% of the vote, his opponent got 47%. This is not a landslide, this is not the voice of the people saying he's wonderful, or that they're "sending a message to the Obama administration that they're too liberal." This looks a lot more, to me, as though the Democratic candidate was just not someone people wanted to vote for. If there had been an attractive Independent candidate to split the votes I'd bet Brown would not have won.

I have one coworker who's all delighted with this result. He thinks Dems and Obama are ruining the country, and the media is telling him that a lot of people agree with him.

I don't want to believe this is true.

Comments

[kryptyd.livejournal.com]

When the voters swing between two parties (as they largely do both there are here) I don't think you can really take anything as a "sign" of anything. Or you can, and just know that in a a couple of years things will swing back the other way. It's kind of a depressing way to look at it really, because nothing concrete will ever get done (or it will and will subsequently be undone), but it's better than in my country where the two big parties are so similar you can't even tell the difference between the two of them!

Of course the real truth is that I think republicans (your ones, not our ones) are sick in the head and shouldn't be given a vote, but we can't be saying things like that can we?

[derien.livejournal.com]

Yeah, we can't be saying things like that even though I'm SURE YOU'RE RIGHT! Instead I say things like "Wouldn't it be nice if we could have a psychological/reasoning skills adulthood test everyone had to pass, and if they didn't they wouldn't get to procreate or vote?"