Uploaded by sarahnettoo on Mar 12, 2012
Comment:
This caught my attention because of what has happened in this present campaign. It is the way that a small number of people can have a rather large impact on the perceptions of the people of an entire nation.
Why hasn't Newt done better? It may be useful to consider that question within the context of what happened with Palin.
I haven't researched it very far, but so far, I'd say that the main problem seems to be within the Republican Party. Insiders will trash somebody, and the media will aid and abet it.
Levin goes ballistic on these two. They may have been as responsible as anybody for the bad image that Palin got.
As for Newt, I think it could be related to his failure to support President George H.W. Bush when he broke his "read my lips, no new taxes" pledge. They won't forgive him for that, and so they trashed him. The media picked up on it and amplified it, and the public believes it.
I can segue into a theory I thought up yesterday. That is this: there's a faction within the Republican party that believes the people are the problem. They have an adversarial attitude towards the public. Taking that a bit further, I think it could be possible that these people may think the public is an enemy.
Could this also be present in the Democrat party? Well, that's a different question, so I'll leave that for another discussion.
Update:
Here's a couple Wikipedia links on Wallace and Schmidt. It could well be that the fate of a nation turns on small details like this- just a couple a weak links in a presidential campaign could break the entire campaign and change history.
No comments:
Post a Comment