Politics is more about style than substance. An example of this is the enthusiasm among religious conservatives for former senator Fred Thompson. "He's right on the issues," an anonymous Catholic conservative tells The Washington Times. "He's better than all of the above." But is he? Thompson supported the dreaded McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform and took a middling position on abortion when he first ran for the senate in 1994. John McCain has had a solid pro-life record, but the love affair that once burned between him and the media, his attacks upon Southern evangelicals, and the fact that he ran so hard against George W. Bush in 2000 makes him unpopular with religious conservatives who hate the media, love the president, and respect the televangelists the Arizona senator went after. Thompson, on the other hand, has a Southern accent and plays stodgy, crusty politicians on television and in the movies. Thompson's backers may indeed be right that he would be better for the Right if elected president than Rudy McRomney, but many of his past transgressions against conservative holy writ are not so different from the current frontrunners. Add that Thompson is from Tennessee, and not Massachusetts or New York, and his past liberal stances seem more a matter of the heart than of political calculation.
Style over substance affects both parties. The Ivy-League glitz of John F. Kennedy proved more appealing to liberals than the Southwestern drawl of the crude Lyndon Johnson. When it came to substance, Johnson delivered exponentially more to liberals than his northeastern predecessor. But he didn't bring the right style, so liberals never loved the man the way they loved Kennedy. The style of enemies also affects mass judgment of them. Richard Nixon signed the Clean Water Act, enacted price controls, opened up dialogue with China, ended the Vietnam war, and launched the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. But something about him (His 5 o'clock shadow? His meager upbringing? His membership on the House Committee on Un-American Activities?) rubbed liberals raw. The liberals hatred of President Bush, whose background presents the perfect storm of symbols--rich kid, oil company executive, Texas drawl, evangelical Christian--to override any substantive assessment of his policies. Even if he hadn't have launched the Iraq war, Bush never had a chance with the Left no matter how many prescription drugs he gave away or No Child Left Behind Acts he signed.
Voting for style over substance on Election Day means getting a president of style over substance the suceeding four years. Is it really better for liberals to get a president with an affected intellectual accent than it is to get, say, national health insurance? Is it really better for conservatives to get a president that chews tobacco and likes NASCAR than it is to get, say, conservative jurists? It's not, but style makes people feel better.
How depressing. It's like getting excited for next season, only to discover that your team is planning to field the same lousy players they did the year before. How can these men be the best the Republicans have to offer?
There's no doubt that I'll stay home on election day. Of course, I live in Texas so it won't much matter.
Why stay home when you could vote for Ron Paul? He won't win, but if enough people vote for him, it will send the right message to the GOP.
Being a Tennessee gal, I watched Thompson while in the Senate. He has a strong and conservative record during his years in the Senate.
There are definitely some votes that I don't agree with Thompson on--and I would guess that they are the same as yours.
But while Thompson definitely has style, he possesses the substance to go with it. In his case, they are not mutually exclusive attributes.
Thompson was a true friend to conservatives when none of the state big wigs would touch a conservative organization--at least out in the open. I think if you will study Thompson, you will find that there is much to like.
Ron Paul strikes me as another crazy libertarian. In the "debate" tonight he was asked what spending cuts he would make, and he said that he'd eliminate the department of energy, the department of homeland security, the department of education, etc. It's just not a plausible position. Reminds me of the Constitution Party: "Slash government down to its Constitutional limits." It's politically impossible now and in the forseeable future.
It seems as though the substance / style issue is more prevalent on the Left than in the GOP camp. Republican voters are typically more interested in what a candidate is bringing to the table substantively than what kind of style he possesses (see GWB). It’s the Left that seems to be enamored with candidates who are long on style with substance being an after thought. To that end, beats me how a lying, two faced, pandering weasel like John Edwards continues to hold sway on a top spot in the Dem polls. This guy has been caught up in everything he says or does and time and again has demonstrated how disingenuous and sleazy he is. Yet, he still ranks a high third among Democratic voters as a potential presidential candidate. I know he looks good in a suit but come on.
Hot debate issue?...Should the Confederate flag continue to be flown over publics buildings?
As Happy Gilmore once said: who gives a $hit.
Is there any question that there is a difference with regard to maturity between the two political philosophies when MSNBC hosts the first GOP debate with leftist moderator Chris Matthews and Fox hosts the second with moderate right moderator Chris Wallace? Instead of, essentially, asking questions like "what's you favorite color", as Matthews did, Wallace asked substantive serious questions.
Ben-T, hate to say it, but your boy appeared to be a little nutty in the debate last night with regard to his take on the war. So, why is it that we want to vote for him? To send the GOP a message?
So is the Central Intelligence Agency nutty? Is the Commisson on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States?
They both say exactly the same thing Paul said. But maybe Guliani is a better expert.
