"I’m going to be dishonest to get elected because unless I get elected, I can’t be honest."
-Michael Bloomberg, talking about this years presidential campaigns.
Check out this article about what Bloomberg has to say about both candidates. After reading the article I though about where we (the class) all fell on the political/social ideals questionare in comparison to where Romney and Obama were positioned. Do you think its easier said than done, and that Bloomberg himself could never create the substancial amount of change that he wants to see. Thoughts...
I do not disagree with his argument. Although I think I would use the verbiage of "misleading" rather than dishonest. Right after the most recent debate I watched a segment on CNN called "reality check" about where the candidates where honest or dishonest during their speeches. More often than not they were telling the truth, but simply not the whole truth, or a certain angle of the truth. Being dishonest with people will not get you elected these days because people can fact check and information can travel so fast you can not get away with it. Manipulation of the truth is far better than being dishonest to get elected.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Travis about the wording of this issue. We have actually talked about this many times when watching the debates in my house, specifically how the candidates see to just say what they think will make people happy enough to vote for them. Like Bloomberg, I too would love to see the candidates take a stand on issues and thoroughly explain their plans to address them, instead of vaguely stating what they could potentially do and making sure that their party is also happy. And yes, even though it is not what we want to see from the candidates as voters, it would be much worse if they were blatantly lying.
ReplyDeleteI think that Bloomberg has a lot of good thoughts here, and that this is a nice kind of level-headed appeal to the candidates to do more than simply represent their parties. As long-time Mayor of New York City, Bloomberg is in a position to know how to do the kind of complicated politics inherent in being president, and from everything that I've heard he seems to be the kind of forward thinking politician that could save our country in the near future. As advice for the candidates, I think that Mr Bloomberg has makes only good points here, but the real value in his remarks is the way that he takes both Romney and Obama down a peg. There is perhaps no bargaining tactic is as effective as telling someone who values your judgement that you are disappointed in them.
ReplyDeleteI think Bloomberg presents some interesting points, and I truly appreciate his honesty regarding the election process. This interview takes us directly back to the Political Compass exercise, because we see how our two candidate's positions are so similar, as Bloomberg reiterated. I too, wish they could take more of a stand on issues, as opposed to pandering. Romney has changed his position so much, its almost comical, on a variety of issues to pander to voters.
ReplyDeleteI would endorse Bloomberg as a candidate if I resided in NYC, and really admire his ability to be an individual with unique views on domestic issues. His point,
"I do think that Romney’s business experience would be valuable, but I don’t know that running Bain Capital gives you the experience to run the country"--is also a good point to mention. Romney prides himself on running the 'small business' of Bain Capital, and fixing the Olympics, but in all sincerity--these are incredibly different ventures than balancing the budget for an entire nation. I don't think he has any credibility on national/international economic concerns.
I think that there should certainly be a budget-cap on campaign spending, because all this pandering is a direct reflection of its influences. Its undemocratic, that things like Citizens United, passed and carry our elections through today. More spending has been accrued during this election--than in any other previous. Its time for some change. If we want to lose this voter pandering, we need to restructure this money incentive, that drives the majority of it.