This goes out to the "older" members on the board.  What is it with politics today?  Was there the same amount of "mud slinging" and airing of dirty laundry back in say the 40's or 50's?  Or is it just more visible with the technolgy available to us today.  I mean with the internet available, if a tree falls in China, we can see it in real time if we wanted to.  It seems like the the name of the game in today's politics is to lie cheat and steal your way to victory and then "not recall" all of your campaign promises.  And how about getting more elected officials into office that actually work and that actually have a clue what it is like to earn a "working (wo)man's" salary and not have things handed to them.

I am looking for honest opinions, not to have any flame wars started.  If all you want to do is bash someone for their opinion, this thread is NOT for you.      

I believe that government/politics have always been somewhat on the shady side. We just didn't know it back then. Our 24/7 media outlets have only worsened the cause. We have a divided county with a clearly divided media. Coupled with the fact that there are many sheeple out there that do not pay any attention to politics what so ever. In defense of them...they don't know who or what to believe anymore.

To be anywhere near savvy in choosing who would be the best candidate, we have to 'research' their past voting records. What their platform was and is today. And this all takes time and energy. Something most don't have these days.

I also feel that some feel beaten down by the system that appears to be growing into a socialist beast devouring everything and everyone in it's path.

As far as the nastiness....I don't believe it was anywhere near as nasty as it is now. There is no respect, no accountability and no consequences.

Thanks for that response bumble.  

I guess I could be counted in that flock of sheeple you mention.  I listened to, or at least tried to any way, the national conventions when they were on the major networks and I don't think I am any more knowledgeable now than I was before.  All I heard was a lot of each parties candidate praising themselves and bashing the opponent.  That was in between all of the "I have a plan to fix...."  Great, they have a plan, how about sharing that plan with the rest of us so we can get an idea of what you plan to do.  

The journalists and news analysts are they any help either?  Whatever happened to reporting the facts and not putting their own spin on things just so they can win another "coveted" award.  You hit the nail right on the head.  I, as well as probably 90% of the other citizens of voting age, don't have the time to devote to deciphering all of the political jargon.  Was it Walter Cronkite that ended his reports with "And that's the way it was..." or something similar?  Give us all the facts so we can form our own opinions.  

Well look at the facts you have a fake conserv and a liberal and the fake conserv puts a criminal feminist who is engaged in a coverup over here emails on the ticket  so we are in some trouble over here arent we?

The difference between now in then is Fox News and the internet.  Prior to Fox News, Democrats had a monopoly of the mainstream media, with those who share their philosophical points of view.  ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, NPR, all feeding the same message to the American people.  No counter balance, no different points of view.  America's news was disseminated through the political filters of Walter Cronkite, Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings, all people leaned left on the political scale.  Now with The Fox News Channel and internet bloggers, stories which may not have been reported because of the political ramifications of those in which the mainstream media were friendly with are being reported by Fox or Drudge.  

Dan Rather's Bush guard story is a prime example of the change of times.  A news story that was release shortly before the 04' election, with the intentions to derail Bush's re-election chances.  A story that was discovered to be unsubstantiated and false by the internet bloggers a day after it aired.  30 years ago, that story would have aired and the public would never have know the real truth of the story.  Do you think that's the first time that Rather aired a story that contained half truths?  

So as it stand now, Fox New and conservative talk radio, have dug in on their side, and the CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, and the New York Times have dug in on their side.  And they bomb back in forth with information that is spun one way or the other, and we the people have to discern truth and lies.  

Quoted from 221

Thanks for that response bumble.  

I guess I could be counted in that flock of sheeple you mention.  I listened to, or at least tried to any way, the national conventions when they were on the major networks and I don't think I am any more knowledgeable now than I was before.  

Good for you crash...at least you 'tried' and hopefully are continuing to.

Walk into a welfare office and ask some of the recipients of the social program what obama or mccain's platform is.

Go into a government subsidized medical clinic and ask some of those recipients who obama or mccain's running mate is.

Walk into a government subsidized chemical abuse program and ask the par-taker's of the program when election day is.

Check out any government taxpaid program and ask if they know what political party obama and mccain represent.

What we need more of and what many lack is EDUCATION, EDUCATION, EDUCATION.

I am a relative newcomer to politics and the things I have learned over the last eight years make me want to stick my head back in the sand sometimes.  I agree the internet is the newest tool for slinging mud.  Think about it, you could sit down and spin a tale either pro or con on any candidate, make it sound factual and send it to thousands or millions with the push of a button. They will believe it. I have received several concerning both candidates that, of course, turn out to be a lie.  No one can run on their own merits, they have to win by belittling their opponent.  An example, during the primaries Clinton hated Obama and said some pretty nasty things.  Day after, every thing is fine and she supports him.  When was she lieing?  During all her statements before the primaries when she disagreed with everything he stood for or after the primary when he was the best thing since sliced bread.  At some point something was a lie.  The same scenerio goes for the local congressional primary.  I personally can't bad mouth someone one day and be their biggest supporter the next.  
I really don't believe anything unless I hear it come directly from a candidate in its entirety, none of this editing crap to put a twist on it.

Seems to me that a "Government of the people, by the people and for the people" is only meant for certain people.

Take a look at voting history:

Popular vote 1960        Kennedy 34,220,984      Nixon 34,108,157       Total votes   68,329,141
Popular vote 1980           Regan     43,903,230      Carter 35,480,115       Total votes  79,383,345
Popular vote 1988           Bush (1)     48,886,597      Dukakis 41,809,476     Total votes  90,696,073
Popular vote 1992           Clinton     44,909,806      Bush 39,104,550      Perot 19,743,821  Total votes  103,758,177
Popular vote  1996        Clinton 47,402,357              Dole 39,198,755         Total votes  86,601,112
Popular vote      2000        Bush (2) 50,456,002      Gore 50,999,897 (Bush received more electoral votes)  Total votes  101,455,899
Popular vote      2004        Bush 62,040,610              Kerry  59,028,444       Total votes  121,069,054


My theory is the network and cable news media (of all beliefs) has greatly influenced the number of voters - educated or not.  I also believe firmly that the internet has played a SIGNIFICANT role in the elections - judging from the last two 100+ million votes and the dawn of the internet since 2000.

Quoted from 221

Thanks for that response bumble.  

I guess I could be counted in that flock of sheeple you mention.  I listened to, or at least tried to any way, the national conventions when they were on the major networks and I don't think I am any more knowledgeable now than I was before.  All I heard was a lot of each parties candidate praising themselves and bashing the opponent.  That was in between all of the "I have a plan to fix...."  Great, they have a plan, how about sharing that plan with the rest of us so we can get an idea of what you plan to do.  

The journalists and news analysts are they any help either?  Whatever happened to reporting the facts and not putting their own spin on things just so they can win another "coveted" award.  You hit the nail right on the head.  I, as well as probably 90% of the other citizens of voting age, don't have the time to devote to deciphering all of the political jargon.  Was it Walter Cronkite that ended his reports with "And that's the way it was..." or something similar?  Give us all the facts so we can form our own opinions.  

They are called "experts".....I am an 'expert' at giving enemas, injections, taking blood pressures etc.......anyone have a seat for me
on their show?????? ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...........

I'm sure we have 'expert' toilet uncloggers, drinkers, gamblers, eaters etc.........what a strange world we live in....

I once read somewhere "....knowledge shall be everywhere in those days...."