Saturday, October 30, 2010
We did. In 2008. Obama changed a lot of things that many people can’t accept, and now they want to change it back. One step forward, two steps back in a country where the majority hovers just over 50% in any given election. Conventional wisdom says political campaigns should go nice late in the game, and that’s why Linda is being all chill here. (The rational being that a nice, family image is hard for opponents to trash.)
So as last-minute campaigns beg for your vote, Linda points out the biggest contradiction of any election cycle. Every two years we hear about career politicians who need ousting. Doesn’t the system though get to all politicians eventually? Aren’t they running because they want a career in politics? Why take someone who only wants in for two years.
Yet each election’s crop of candidates believes they’re somehow different. The real problem ain’t the players however – it’s the game. And that ain’t changing because who among them is willing to tear down a two-party system that gets them elected.
Barring that fundamental change, what newbie running for office will suddenly be able to do what longstanding high-profile Senators haven’t?
Ever the optimist though, here’s my offer to the Lindas out there this near-election eve: I’m willing to give you the two years you haven’t even given Obama.* Do what you say you will. If by 2012 you don’t? You step down and go write a book or something. (Incumbents too.)
That’s change I can believe in.
*Before anyone says comparing presidential and congressional elections is apples and oranges, this election was turned into a referendum on Obama long before he took office.)