This is the price of apathy?

by thoughtfulconservative

I usually don’t take on Community Columnists at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. I was one once. But the one in Thursday’s paper is useful for a point, because it reflects what I see in liberal thought toward conservatives.

The 2010 election saw a full 50% of the electorate sit on their hands and do nothing. Among those who did vote, one has to wonder just how much effort was put into understanding the issues, the proposed solutions and the historical performance of the candidates.

via This is the price of apathy – JSOnline.

I’ve written about apathy before, even as a member of the Community Columnists. However, Mr. Bell is not really writing about apathy.

The Republicans got elected promising jobs and have pulled a fast one on all of us. Behind the foible of “budget,” they used the issue to drive home every bit of longed for right-wing goodies – and now, some who voted for them feel duped.

Yes, this is another screed about those no good Republicans.

What was that whole brown bag lunch that the liberals liked to ridicule so much, all about anyway?

That’s right. The budget.

How soon they forget.

But that seems to be the liberal tactic, that somehow the Republicans pulled a bait and switch on the people of Wisconsin.

“Jobs was what the Republicans promised.”

Well, yeah and the brown bag lunch. Living within your means.

Hmmm, I wonder if Mr. Bell was truly “duped?” Because the article sure didn’t give the feel of one who had been duped.

So who’s doing the duping?

As usual, what it comes down to is that the GOP lied and stupid people voted for them.

Same ol’ same ol’.

About these ads

9 Comments to “This is the price of apathy?”

  1. It is getting old. I’d love a fresh approach from the left.

  2. Hello Dean. Hopped over from your FC post. This is a bait and switch article or as some might say, “smoking mirrors”. Firstly, the 50% of voters sitting on their hands is to imply only us stupid Republicans voted when in fact at least 40% or more of Americans do not vote in any particular election. The over 50% of voters voting in Wisconsin in 2010 was 5th highest in the nation. The sour grapes article glosses over the fact that many votes in 2010, even though he was not on the ballot, were anti-Obama votes. The memory of all those public meetings where Democrats were telling their electorate how they didn’t understand ObamaCare or that Uncle Sam knows what’s best for us also cost them many votes and seats all across America. I don’t feel duped. I suspect the writer could not produce factual information to back up his claim.

    http://elections.gmu.edu/Turnout_2010G.html

  3. That about sums up my feeling, too, Randy. The Democrats may get back control with the recall elections, but I suppose it depends on who worries the voters more here, Obama or Walker.

  4. Judging by the governor’s approval rating right now compared to his election results I’d say a lot of people do really feel bait-and-switched. This isn’t a Democratic meme. It’s a real thing. You can disagree with them if you’d like, but it’s not something Democrats made up.

  5. I would hold that voter apathy is a terrible, and noticeable, thing. I’ve felt for a long time that it’s one of our greatest duties, as Americans, to educate ourselves on candidates and issues, both national and local. Unfortunately, I don’t see much of that, and part of what scares me is seeing people who ARE vocal on issues, but don’t seem to know what they’re talking about (Tea Party or American Communist Party, anyone?). I had really, seriously hoped the public option on healthcare would become a reality, but obviously, it didn’t, and that’s just one of the things that have a lot of current and former democratic voters disillusioned with Presnit Obama and the Dems in Congress. The ‘Hopey, Changey thing’ DIDN’T work out like we’d hoped (Palin? CORRECT? *faints*). Oh, there have been great strides made in some areas, such as consumer protections, but I think we’ve backslid more than anything since the ‘O’ took office.

    I’m coming very close to only voting for 3rd party candidates, where available, to do my part to break up this clusterfsck of a two-party system. I might even throw my vote for Paul in 2012. I’m deathly afraid of Michele Bachmann, though.

  6. Third party candidates? I guarantee that voting for them can only hurt. Lots of people seem to believe that voting for candidates who have virtually no chance of winning will somehow make them and their party more viable. It will not. What we need is to break the stranglehold of the 2 party system by other means. Like instant runoff elections and other structural changes. Right now you either vote for the candidate you hate the least, or you vote 3rd party and essentially vote for the candidate you hate the most.

  7. A pox on both their houses? Sure. And that seems to be what the American people think, too, at the moment.

    But I don’t think a third party would do any better or an independent, for that matter.

    Washington seems to have this peculiar influence on people.

    We’re stuck with the two-party system, like it or not…

  8. At the very least we could wrest presidential debates back from the parties and give it back to the league of women voters. You might get more 3rd party candidates in debates, anyway. Not enough by itself to change much, but it’s a start.

  9. Starts are always worth something…but I’m just a pessimistic guy… :)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,647 other followers

%d bloggers like this: