I wrote a post a few months ago on politics and primarily
about speaking out/not/etc. But this election was big. The stakes were high. It
didn’t go my way.
So I want to publicly state my views here. You can agree or disagree, but it’s what I think, and my life experience, education, and values have shaped my political views as I’m sure your own has shaped yours.
Republican vs. Democrat:
I guess I’m a Republican. I really like the idea of being
neither, but I’m pretty Republican, so I guess except in rare cases, that I’m a
Republican. Does that mean I agree with 100% of the Republican party? No. But I
agree with most of it.
My first election I had just turned 18. I didn’t register.
It was 1992. Bush Sr. vs. Clinton vs. Ross Perot. I really liked Ross Perot! I
wasn’t enthused about Bush because of the economy. (I realize now that I didn’t
understand economics at all – like many I tied the economy directly to the
President in office at the time. I thought I was wisely not re-electing George
HW Bush.) I didn’t really look at Clinton at all. Perot sounded good and he
seemed to have the answers. If I had registered I would have absolutely casted
my vote for Ross Perot. A throw away vote that ultimately a lot of people cast
and put Clinton in the White House. I would reconsider that now. But I was so
idealist back then, as many young people are. Many Democrats are idealists. I
like aspiring to a higher ideal, but in politics I think it can be very
short-sighted.
So back to my thought process. 1996 came. I was a college
graduate, from a super conservative school – Texas A&M University. I still
wasn’t really into politics, but when it came to big elections I felt it was
important to do my civic duty and learn about the candidates and vote. I was in
graduate school getting my MBA. I ignored all the Clinton scandals and voted
for Clinton. I thought the scandals were concocted by all the haters. And if
you put those aside, I liked the fact that he balanced the budget and I liked
the Family Leave Act. I didn’t have any big complaints and wasn’t enthused
about Dole. So I voted for him. I was an assistant for a professor at the time
who made the point to me “but do you not think that leadership from the
President of the United States is important?” I stood firm that I was happy
with him overall, except in reducing the military, and that I was going to go
ahead and vote for him.
Then Monica Lewinsky happened. I also entered the workforce.
I was disgusted about Monica Lewinsky. The scandals from the first term were
true. I understood my professor’s point. Yes, setting an example DOES matter. I
knew Gore was not Clinton, but I didn’t really care for him, and wanted no tie
to Clinton whatsoever. Add on top of that the governor from my great state of
Texas, George W Bush, who I was very happy with at home, getting put on the
ticket. I loved W! He truly had done a lot in Texas and people on both sides
liked him. It was easy to get behind him. And then I saw something I’d never
noticed before – how much the other side tried to paint a different picture of
the man who was the head of my state. How I agreed with his platform and how it
was twisted into something entirely different by the Democratic party. Then the
election. Then Florida. Then recalls and hanging chads (called for by Gore).
Then Bush winning fair and square and the left yelling for four years how he
stole the election. Then 9/11 happened. Forced him into some really difficult
decisions for our country, along with many other challenges that were thrown
his way. And I agree with most of his actions. The left calling him a liar.
Saying outlandish things about how he made up things about WMD’s when
intelligence showed they were there. I saw him called a murderer, by people who
held office in the Democratic party. Not just the crazies who vote for
Democrats, but the politicians themselves. Bush was not given a chance from day
1 because he “stole” the election. Filibusters. So much divisiveness and disrespect
that I had never seen before. I don’t know if it was there before and I just
hadn’t noticed, but I sure noticed during his 8 years in office. Then there was
the media. They did it too. They jumped on board.
And what did it do? Pushed me completely into the Republican
party. It would take a lot for me to vote for a Democrat, especially on a
federal level, at this point. But if it was a right-wing nut vs a sound
moderate Democrat, it’s possible. But both sides have moved further right and
further left, that it’s very hard to stay in the middle. So I’ve moved to the
right.
Then there was Obama. I thought John McCain was okay. I
certainly greatly respected him, and one thing that I particularly liked about
John McCain, was that he was a moderate. Our system is really messed up. It’s
so hard to win the primary if you’re a moderate, and yet I believe we need
moderates running the country. Everyone would be so much happier with a
moderate! Look at Clinton! Despite his despicable escapades in the bedroom,
most people were generally happy. He was in the middle. I remember thinking I
wouldn’t be able to stand it if Hilary Clinton were our president, but give me
her over Obama any day. I think the Clinton’s at least are pretty sound on a
lot of things. I just didn't care for her personality. But in my maturity I no longer care much about personality, so long as someone's not a jerk. I care about ideas, principles, policy, and leadership.
So McCain was okay, in the middle, great patriot. Obama was
as far left and extreme as you can go. Never would vote for him in a million
years. But he won. And now twice. This time against another man who is a
moderate, that has a life of service AND success, with great ideas, and another
great patriot. I think America really passed up a great president. At times he
was a little out of touch, but I think he’s been in the service of enough
people of all walks of life to be compassionate to their plights. And he sure
didn’t have things handed to him. He built his business on his own. But again,
he was made out to be someone evil, and people bought into it. And it worked. I
guess if that election strategy proves to be successful people will continue to
use it.
While I get tired of the two parties being to the extreme,
because I think again we need people in the middle, I actually believe that
it’s good to have the two parties. Republicans in my opinion are good on the
economy and foreign policy, but Democrats do a lot of things for domestic
policy (though those things are getting more extreme now too and not sitting as
well with me anymore). So I think the two sides keep us in balance, even though
they slow down our progress on getting things done because they don’t work
together very well.
I also find it interesting that the older I got and the more I experienced, the more to the right I went, and the more I understood so MANY of the issues at hand. I fully admit that what I based my early decisions on and what I thought I knew were very limited. My understanding was very shallow. And I was someone going to school and getting educated. I honestly think the voting age is too young. There are not many college-aged kids (yes, kids) who have a clear understanding of most of these things. The great majority are mostly concerned with dating and parties and having fun. I know I was. But as my husband says "you can't tell someone they're old enough to die for our country but they're not old enough to vote." He's completely right. I wish for those serving in the military you could make an exception. But none of that will ever happen so it's part of the framework we have to work within.
I also find it interesting that the older I got and the more I experienced, the more to the right I went, and the more I understood so MANY of the issues at hand. I fully admit that what I based my early decisions on and what I thought I knew were very limited. My understanding was very shallow. And I was someone going to school and getting educated. I honestly think the voting age is too young. There are not many college-aged kids (yes, kids) who have a clear understanding of most of these things. The great majority are mostly concerned with dating and parties and having fun. I know I was. But as my husband says "you can't tell someone they're old enough to die for our country but they're not old enough to vote." He's completely right. I wish for those serving in the military you could make an exception. But none of that will ever happen so it's part of the framework we have to work within.
So, I’m not trying to be a political analyst here, but
giving some background on how I’ve come to where I am and what I’ve done in the
past. I have a lot more to say. Part 2 coming soon.
I found your blog a few months ago, and I have enjoyed reading about your adventures. (Your girls are adorable, by the way!) I appreciate this post, despite having a completely different political viewpoint. For the most part, this post was very respectful, something that I agree that our country could use much more of. I also agree that this country would be run better by moderates, and the current primary system makes it difficult, if not impossible, to nominate moderates
ReplyDeleteHowever, I am confused by your statement that President Obama is an extreme leftist. I have not necessarily seen this to be true, and I am interested in examples that you could give. I ask this honestly and without hate. I hope that comes across. Like you were with W, I have been horrified by attacks from the extreme right wing on our President over the past four years. I hope that you can recognize both political parties doing this to each other (which is a sad thing).
In the case of Mr. Romney, he was certainly a moderate when serving as governor of Massachusetts. However, due to the current extreme right wing dominance in the Republican party, he had to abandon most of these stances in order to win the nomination. What I saw (and what I think other voters saw - thus Tuesday's result) was an inability to stand up to extremists in the Republican party. I believe that if he couldn't do it during a campaign, it would also not happen during his presidency. Further, I am from Ohio, and his untrue comments about GM and Chrysler were truly offensive. I am hoping that this was a story that he was urged to stick to by advisors and did not necessarily do it of his own accord.
Anyway, I know that this has been a long comment (I'm sorry!), but I truly am interested to hear what you have to say about this. I hope this came across as respectful because it is definitely meant to be read that way.
Hi Lizzy! Actually I am so glad you commented. I am really trying to understand the other side and how this country sees two entirely different things. But it can be so difficult sometimes - everything I see on Facebook gets so ugly so fast. I actually want to throw some things out there and I don't think it would go well so I don't. That's why I turned it onto my blog instead. It really helps me sort things out and clear my head to write it all down and put it out there. And I'm all for a respectful discussion.
ReplyDeleteI do think both parties attack each other horribly. As for being an extreme leftist, yes, I believe he is the most liberal president by far that we've ever had. And he was the most liberal in the democratic primaries. I think he is for government spending way more than any other president. In other words, I know democrats/libs are for bigger government compared to republicans/conservatives, but he wants to give away more than any other president we've ever had. Take the free cell phones for instance? That is a small one but it's an example of complete unnecessary spending by the government. Food stamps - it's the opposite of welfare reform. I believe he is extreme when it comes to spending. Have you read his book "Dreams From My Father"? He has a very different view of America and its place in the world more than any other president. He truly wants to transform America to be more like other countries and in my opinion this is an extreme view. I think his view on abortion is about as extreme as you can get. So those are just a few examples that I can give without writing a book myself. :)
As for Romney, yes, he moved to the right when seeking the nomination. I hate that. Again, a big problem with our political process. But I didn't think his move was so extreme that it should cause concern. He aligned himself a little more with the party and I believe he would have held firm with the things he said as he sought nomination. I don't see him as a flip-flopper at all. I think his political views evolved as his career did. I'm okay with that as long as it's not all over the board. Look at my own experience in how I've voted. We should be open to changing. Of course, we want to know what we are voting for. I can see how that might cause some confusion to some but to me I guess because I'm a moderate/right person either way is fine with me and closer aligned with me than anything on the left. I feel convicted that Romney would have done what's best for the country as a whole, as he has done that in other areas in his life. As governor he worked very well with both sides.
As for the auto industry, what were his comments if you don't mind me asking? I will be very honest. I live in Texas - we get almost no ads here for presidential campaigns, and I did not follow everything about the auto industry. I think Obama's move was more risky but worked faster. In general I think bailouts are a terrible idea and for me that is a last resort (if that). I think Romney's idea of a planned bankruptcy is actually a sound business decision. I think either president would have helped one way or the other. As for the comments told, and I'm referring to the debate where they talked about the auto industry, it seemed to me to be a case of he said/she said. I think sometimes politicians lie, and sometimes they both have such a jaded view of the other side that they truly believe things and then say things that are not entirely true. And they should be held accountable for that but I believe that they often BELIEVE they are telling the truth. But again, which comments are you referring to? I will admit that I don't have much opinion on this issue because it is so far removed from me (and because with my 4 children my time to follow every issue of politics is somewhat limited - I don't mean for that to come across blunt - I reread that and it sounds weird but I just mean it was one of those things that I didn't put much stock into. It seemed like the truth was probably somewhere in the middle.) I would like to know more.
ReplyDeleteI'm enjoying the discussion. I will have probably a couple more posts to come....
Thank you for your candor in this post....and I feel we largely concur in feelings and opinions...and I've felt VERY "out of step" with most the folks with whom I interact daily...love them dearly, but disagree with how they feel best to "move forward."
ReplyDeleteWe WILL all make the best of this, but it definitely didn't "go my way" either.
Peace and unity to us all!
Thank you for the insightful and kind response! I agree about the ugliness that we often see - especially on Facebook. (Case in point, my cousin posted a status that she was happy about Obama's reelection, and our uncle wrote a very ugly comment back to her. No reasons on why he didn't support Obama, just a mean-spirited response. Sad to see. And both sides absolutely do this to each other.)
ReplyDeleteI haven't read Obama's book, though I will definitely put it on my reading list - will be interesting. I also didn't know about the cell phones, but would like to read more on those. I believe in the necessity of food stamps, but I do think we need more regulations on them, such as drug testing and job training programs to help get people off welfare/food stamps. I think they do a lot of good, but there are definitely people that abuse the system. (In fact, one of my teaching assistants was just telling me that her friend is selling her food stamps - so she can use the money in other ways! This made me angry because that "ruins" the system for those who use it appropriately and really need the aid. I thought this article was a good example of a welfare success, so to speak - http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/49599727/ns/today-money/t/lazy-welfare-mom-successful-professional/?fb_action_ids=543914378957426&fb_action_types=og.recommends&fb_ref=Stories-addthis-copyright&fb_source=aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=288381481237582 - unfortunately, that is not how the system is used by everyone.
I also agree that I am fine (even happy) with evolution in policies/political opinions. I was 17 when Bush Jr defeated Kerry, who was largely painted as a flip-flopper. I will fully admit that I had a high schooler's understanding of politics (read: AP government class!) - but I remember being confused by the upset of what I had seen as an evolution of ideas. Like I said, I was not very informed, though, so it is very possible that I misread that situation. In Mr. Romney's case, I was more concerned about his changing views on social issues. For example, there seemed to be no consensus from his campaign on abortion (flipped from against in all cases to against except in rape/incest/life of the woman 3 times after the first debate), at least not until the very end. However, I do think that many Americans are fairly steadfast in their views on social issues because it often relates to religion and strongly held personal views. I think that economically, though, as I think you are saying, we need to be more moderate.
Also, here is a link to a NY Times article on Romney's comments about Jeep. He was at a political rally near Toledo, OH, and mentioned that he had read that Jeep was moving production to China. Toledo has a huge Jeep plant and employs a large percentage of Toledo workers. Naturally, workers were scared and called their managers and bosses, who denied the plan. GM and Chrysler both came out with statements explaining that they were planning to begin producing cars in China again for the Chinese market, thus not moving production to China. In fact, both plants have plans to add workers over the next few years.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that politicians (and the rest of us!) often believe that what we are saying is true - better than the alternative, right? :) And there was, indeed, an article stating what Mr. Romney conveyed. However, after the statements from GM and Chrysler, I was hoping to see Romney state that he had misunderstood the article and apologize for creating confusion and anxiety. I would have very much respected that. Instead, the campaign produced commercials stating GM and Chrysler would be producing in China - truthful, yes, but misleading in that it wouldn't cost Americans jobs. I do know, though, that this is in no way the only case of such misrepresentation, and both sides engage in this. This time, it just seemed so blatant, and since it did affect my home state, that probably made me more sensitive to it.
Here is the article: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/49599727/ns/today-money/t/lazy-welfare-mom-successful-professional/?fb_action_ids=543914378957426&fb_action_types=og.recommends&fb_ref=Stories-addthis-copyright&fb_source=aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=288381481237582
Also, I often forget that life is so different in a non-swing state! By the end of last week, I think most Ohioans were done watching live TV, due to the oversaturation of campaign commercials. I would literally see 3 Romney ads in a row, followed by 2 Obama ads, followed by Senate race ads. Crazy stuff! I'm used to it growing up in Ohio, but it is very interesting to hear the lack of commercials, etc. in the non-swing states.
Definitely enjoying this conversation. I have been wanting to hear conservative opinions, without getting swept up in ugliness or "he said/she said" and all of that. Your responses really made me think, and I love that. I also really appreciate how you are able to say why you voted FOR Romney, and not just why you voted against Obama. I think that is so much more powerful.
P.S. I'm sorry for such long comments! This is all just very interesting to me. Looking forward to reading more you!
ReplyDeleteAlso, oops - just realized I posted the welfare article twice, instead of the GM/Chrysler article. Here is that one:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/31/us/politics/2-american-automakers-rebut-claims-by-romney.html