| damkira said: I think consistency on all the major issues is really important for most voters. I believe that is why bush (even though he was consistently wrong....) defeated John Kerry in 2004. |
Kerry just didn't know how to handle the issue. The whole "I voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it" thing would have gone away if he had the ability to explain himself in a coherent manner that the average Joe could understand.
What's sad is that these are the kinds of things that win or lose elections -- whatever stupid things the media decides to latch onto and play over and over again, spinning them into some kind of character flaw. That's why politicians never give you a straight answer to your questions. If they gave the media a straight answer, they'd just spin it into something else!
The other thing is that politicians seem to win not by doing things right, but by making fewer mistakes than their opponent. It's very difficult to convince someone to vote for you if they aren't already on your side. On the other hand, it's very easy to convince someone not to vote for you by simply saying anything that they disagree with. People tend not to see the bigger picture, and won't vote for someone they disagree with on one little thing even if they align perfectly on everything else. This is another reason for not getting straight answers out of politicians. If they can just dance around the issue and make it sound like they're saying something important, without actually saying anything, they win. But the minute they open their mouths and something meaningful comes out, they've just lost thousands of votes.
What makes a candidate electable? Political maneuverability.
