2008 Presidential election will be decided by FEAR.

@speakeasy (4215)
United States
October 18, 2008 7:44pm CST
That's right. This election will not be decided based on the issues that face our country; it will be decided by the fears of the voters. When supporters of both Obama and McCain were asked why they supported their candidate the response was not about the good things the candidate was promising concerning the issues. The responses were overwhelmingly about the belief that if the opposing party won the race the country will be completely and totally devastated. They said they MUST vote for one candidate, not because they believed in the candidate; but, because it would be a DISASTER if the other party won. Obama "supporters" are afraid that if McCain wins it will mean a continuation of the policies of the Bush administration and they fear the country will sink further into a recession. They are afraid that they will lose their homes, jobs, and retirement while big business grows even larger. McCain "supporters" are afraid that if Obama wins he will give the country away to foreign interests, betray the American people, destroy and/or overtax businesses (if the businesses fail there WON"T be any jobs), and turn the country into a "socialist" country instead of a democracy. When I first read about these interviews, I scoffed. Then I stopped and took a closer examination of my own feelings on this topic. I had to admit, that I also am afraid that if the party I do not support gets elected, that there will be hard times ahead for our country. It would be nice to believe that I am voting for my candidate solely because I agree with his stand on the issues; but, I do have to admit that I support him SO strongly because I am worried about the future of our country under the leadership of the other candidate. So, I have to agree that people's fears are what is going to win or lose this election; not the issues.
3 people like this
7 responses
@Meljep (1668)
• United States
19 Oct 08
It seems as a country that America is ruled by fear. We're afraid we might say the wrong thing, or do the wrong thing or wear the wrong thing, or be politically incorrect and someone might think of us as a racist. Most of the time fear translates into inactivity. People freeze up, even though they know what to do in a certain situation. Fear and distrust seems to be the biggest crisis in America right now.
@speakeasy (4215)
• United States
19 Oct 08
Many people underestimate the strength of fear. Fear is a very powerful emotion. Just ask anyone who has every suffered a panic attack or who has a phobia. Fear overcomes all rational thought. The only thing that I know of that can overcome fear is MAYBE love. But, even then for fear to be overcome by love - the one we love must be perceived as being in danger and we fear the danger to the loved one MORE than we fear the danger to ourselves. America is not the only country that is "ruled by fear" - fear is involved in the day to day lives of almost every country in the world. Some times it is just more obvious than others.
@twoey68 (13651)
• United States
19 Oct 08
To be honest, I think the issues are going to be one of the last things some ppl are going to look at. Fear, race, gender, VP's, religion, ect. will come first. I just want it to be over with...I'm about sick of the whole thing. [b]~~IN SEARCH OF PEACE WITHIN~~ **AGAINST THE STORMS, I WILL STAND STRONG** [/b]
2 people like this
@speakeasy (4215)
• United States
19 Oct 08
I agree and disagree. I do want it to be over if my candidate wins and I do not want it to be over IF the other candidate wins. If the other candidate wins, my fears for the future are just beginning.
@funnysis (2619)
• United States
20 Oct 08
I would like for it to be over with but with the best results possible to save us from a recession if possible.The American people have been through so much in the last few years I think we all need a break and some encouragement.Have a great day
• United States
19 Oct 08
I agree, thats why I don't support either, Americans need to send a message loud and clear that says we wont just choose whoever the heck you give us, and we stand UNITED. I support Ron Paul, the guy who was running on the republican ticket who will still get a lot of votes because a lot of people believe earnestly in him, he is the same Congressman who pushed a bill that said a congressman (or woman) must have read and understood a bill and have an idea of how to fund it BEFORE said congressman can vote on it, IF THAT ISNT A FRIEND OF THE PEOPLE SHOW ME WHAT IS. and instead of promising to cut taxes and give us more health care, he said he would get rid of many of the unnesasary departments of the U.S. Goverment,and that we would get tax deductables for things like health care and education, and we knew he could do that too, because first and formost he was promising to redo a lot of how the government ran, by completely cutting out several of the unnesasary departments. and he saw the economic failure decades ago before he even ran for congress, in fact that is why he ran for congress, but it takes more than one man to fix it, but he wanted to help, and he had our interests at heart...I believe it was the New york primaries ( If memory serves, I might have this one wrong), he was clearly running and wasnt even put on the ticket, he also did not get equal media time as the other candidates...
2 people like this
@speakeasy (4215)
• United States
19 Oct 08
I am sorry, but, I am afraid of Ron Paul also and so were a lot of other people. Yes, he saw the way our country was headed a long time ago. So did a lot of other people and they took steps NOT to end up in bad situations now. We knew the housing bubble was going to burst and we knew that taking out home mortgages that we could barely afford at low rates would be unaffordable when the rates automatically increased in a couple of years. We knew that speculation on oil as a commodity was increasing the cost of gasoline and oil in excess of the actual production costs so we looked for ways to be more fuel efficient and reduce our gasoline usage. The problem is that Ron Paul's solutions were not practical or even feasable. It is fine for a candidate to say they are going to do things; but, the things they say have to be things they can actually achieve and the office of President does not have the power to do the things Ron Paul wanted to do AND Congress would not have supported those changes, so they never would have taken place. FYI, McCain wants to give people tax CREDITS for health care. Credits are better than a deduction any day because a deduction reduces your income but a credit is subtracted from the taxes you owe. With a tax deduction for health care I would still owe taxes but with a tax credit ($2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families) I would no longer be paying any income tax.
3 people like this
• United States
19 Oct 08
Speakeasy,Thanks for pointing out the tax credits vs the tax deductions. McCain's plan also puts the choice in each individual's hands as to which insurance s/he prefers. I think his plan makes a LOT more sense. LilPix, McCain also wants to get rid of unnecessary governmental excess and giving to other countries so that he can do more for the people here. He may be closer to Ron Paul than you think. Unfortunately, voting for Ron Paul will ultimately waste your vote, and possibly put the wrong man in office.
@jonesy123 (3950)
• United States
19 Oct 08
Yes, it's true. That's also how the campaigns have been portraying the opposition. But you have to really look behind why they are running their campaigns to instill fear. It's because they both really can't do much. They both don't understand economics, sometimes it seems not even the basics. But truth be told, even the brightest economist can't tell you right now how to get us out of this. It's new territory and whatever we do will not show overnight effects and everything will be good again. The next four years will be tough and the recovery process may even take longer than that. Both probably had their advisers tell them this. And both know whatever their programs and agendas are, the finances to implement them are not there. One way or another, something has to give. That's also why they keep pointing at each other and say, your plan won't work, there is not money there and it will increase taxes. You'll drag us deeper down into this mess, blah, blah, blah. Democrats and Republicans are responsible for this mess, it started under Clinton, but didn't blow up in our face until Bush took office. But some of the mechanisms were put in place long before Clinton took the office. Lots of blame is to go around. So they really shouldn't go there, although it's nice to blame Bush for everything as most people are unhappy with his performance anyway. That's why Obama gets away with blaming Bush for everything, lol. Anyhow, the only reason to make voters go to the polls and vote for you is to make them fear the opposition. The world is going under if the other one is elected president. We'll be worse off then ever... true, we will, under both, no doubt about it, lol. Personally, I think it's time to overhaul the voting system so a third person has a better chance. Right now, a third party may actually get a lot of votes and would be a balance check in the House and Senate.
2 people like this
@jonesy123 (3950)
• United States
19 Oct 08
I know what you are talking about and have noticed the same similarities, so have others. I just hope that we have enough safeguards in place to prevent anything like that. I also hope that people will see the light and not re-elect him, if he should be our next president. Less damage can be done in four than in eight years, especially if the campaign lasts two years again. We just have to keep our fingers crossed.
2 people like this
@srsddn (98)
• India
19 Oct 08
Many years back on such an occasion somebody in the USA remarked 'One is mad, the other is crazy. I would go along with crazy'. Politicians do create situations wherein they try to instil fear (real or imagined) to attract votes. But once we know it then as learned and informed voters we have to decide in favour or against a candidate. Here lies the power of democracy which I think should rise above fears. Of course, you know the better about it but in such a situation I would prefer crazy to mad person.
@speakeasy (4215)
• United States
19 Oct 08
As I replied to jonesy123 - the candidate I fear caused the fear himself with his own words. I learned long ago to not believe everything that one candidate says about another. But, Obama's own interviews and speeches have damned him in my eyes and opinion. It was the words that came out of his own mouth that placed fear in my heart.
@mehale (2200)
• United States
19 Oct 08
You know, when I first read your discussion topic, I was afraid that I would have to disagree with you completely about it; however when I read your entire post, I found that I actually have to totally agree with you about this. It is really sad to think that an election as important as a Presidential election would be decided based on a "Fear Factor", but with the problems and issues facing our nation - and our two remaining "Big Ticket" choices for President - I can see why that would be the case. While I fully believe that a President should be chosen based on the issue and their character, if I stop to think about it I can see exactly why this will probably not be the case this time around. If McCain had made a different choice as his VP, possibly this would not be the case. If he had chosen someone who could help make up what he lacks in the economic area, then voters would not have to worry so much about an already failing economy should he become the next President. However, by choosing a VP that is neither strong in economics or foreign policy - and also really is not actually prepared to be the next President should something happen that would require her to step up, he actually increased the fear factor, rather than lessening it. There is also the fact that McCain does support and follow Bush quite a bit. Considering the shape our economy is currently in, and the troubles (both current and future) that our nation will be facing - this again increases the Fear Factor. After all, most of us ARE afraid of what 4 more years of failed Bush Policies could bring...(*SIGH*) On the other hand, Obama is "The New Kid on the Block" in so many ways, and actually is an unknown. We really don't know what he will and will not do or be able to do if elected. This increases fears as well. He is running on a platform of "Change" and yet he selected a Senator with a lot of Washington rhetoric experience, so many are forced to wonder if that is just an empty campaign promise rather than a reality. Then there is the fact that he has some (ok I have to say this - don't take it the wrong way) rather questionable associations - and yes this does bother a lot of voters. Especially considering that he is the unknown in this election in a lot of ways. So yes, upon further inspection of my feelings and concerns regarding this election, I have to agree with you that it will probably be decided based on fear of what will happen to our country should the "other guy" get elected. What a shame. (*SIGH*)
1 person likes this
@speakeasy (4215)
• United States
19 Oct 08
So, basically, your reaction was the same as mine - initially disbelief; but then, having to agree. Not only is fear playing a part in the voters perceptions; but, fear has also played a part in the candidate's campaigns and choices. "If McCain had made a different choice as his VP, possibly this would not be the case. If he had chosen someone who could help make up what he lacks in the economic area, then voters would not have to worry so much about an already failing economy should he become the next President." Actually, it is believed that McCain had a personal preference for another candidate; BUT, he was informed by the GOP that if he selected that individual the GOP would not longer support him in his campaing and that would have killed any chance he had at being elected. So he chose Palin out of fear - a complete unknown who would stir the pot but NOT cost him the support of th eGOP. Palin may not have been the best choice; but, compared with other choices that were being pushed at him, she was a wild card that could have helped get him with the women who were supporting Hillary and were now "stuck" with Obama. Obama's own choice of Biden was based on fear that he would lose if he did not have a more experienced VP to back him up. Obama has made statements and then turned around and changed his stance on those same issues from fear - the incident with Russia invading Georgia is only one recent example of such a flip-flop. All because his advisors told him his first reaction would cost him voters - not because he truly changed his mind.
@funnysis (2619)
• United States
20 Oct 08
It is very true that both sides are making it a scary race for the white house and people are going to vote alot out of fear for one side or the other getting in but at least maybe people will turn out in high numbers to vote and we can all hope and pray that things start getting better as time goes by but fast if possible.Have a great day.
@speakeasy (4215)
• United States
21 Oct 08
I am a little concerned about after the votes are cast. With both sides being so afraid of the opposing parties candidate - one side has to lose. How will the losing side react? Some have already threatened to leave the country if their party loses. Will the losers become depressed? Will they become violent or subversive? Their reaction worries me; even though, I would like the waiting to be over.