Home› A Moving Train

the influence of mass media on elections/electability

El_KabongEl_Kabong Posts: 4,141
edited May 2008 in A Moving Train
if you dislike ron paul it doesn't take away from the point of the short clip

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iW5kOB1pmg
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Urban HikerUrban Hiker Posts: 1,312
    Good clip.

    I love Google! It's rad that they have this tool and it certainly demonstrated how media bias can affect the public's perceptions and persuasions.

    http://www.google.com/trends
    Walking can be a real trip
    ***********************
    "We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
    ***********************
    Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
  • dg1979usdg1979us Posts: 568
    That is really interesting. I would venture to guess that within the next few election cycles we will see a Paul or Nader type candidate really become a legitimate candidate, as far as being able to be elected. At some point, the internet is going to overtake mainstream news sources and people are going to take the Paul approach and stick to the internet to get their views out there.
  • AbookamongstthemanyAbookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    dg1979us wrote:
    That is really interesting. I would venture to guess that within the next few election cycles we will see a Paul or Nader type candidate really become a legitimate candidate, as far as being able to be elected. At some point, the internet is going to overtake mainstream news sources and people are going to take the Paul approach and stick to the internet to get their views out there.


    And that is something to be very hopeful about. And all the more reason to get a head start and keep pushing for third party candidates now. It has to start somewhere and if those who know full well that many of these third party candidates are the better choice but simply won't support them due to electability then how can we ever expect a movement to start towards taking them seriously? The point of standing behind a third party this year is to get the message out that this goal we're working towards is more important than voting for either of the 3 mainstreamers who are overwhelming alike in too many areas for my taste and in no way resemble a new direction for this country.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • dg1979usdg1979us Posts: 568
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    And that is something to be very hopeful about. And all the more reason to get a head start and keep pushing for third party candidates now. It has to start somewhere and if those who know full well that many of these third party candidates are the better choice but simply won't support them due to electability then how can we ever expect a movement to start towards taking them seriously? The point of standing behind a third party this year is to get the message out that this goal we're working towards is more important than voting for either of the 3 mainstreamers who are overwhelming alike in too many areas for my taste and in no way resemble a new direction for this country.

    We are getting to a point, where people who grew up with the internet and alternative news sources, are able to understand politics, and have the ability to vote. Ron Paul has really made a splash considering how "non-mainstream" he is compared to the other mainstream candidates. It isnt going to happen this year, but I would venture to guess that 3rd parties are going to really gain a lot of attention and votes in this upcoming election, at least compared to past elections. I prefer Nader over Paul, but Paul has a much bigger following at this point. If Paul stays in until November I will possibly give him my vote. I prefer Nader, but I think Paul has more of a chance to make a splash, and I do like a lot of Paul's stances too.

    If you look at Obama, he basically rose from mainstream media attention. Until the 04 convention, nobody had ever heard of him on a national level, and all of a sudden he was a media darling and the future of the democrat party due to one speech. But, I think (and hope), that the mainstream media influence is becoming less relevant. It wont matter this election, but I think it could by 2012 or at least 2016. And as much as I like and respect Nader, Paul is the one that is going to change things in that regard. Paul wont ever be elected, but his methods of obtaining attention and getting his message out is going to open up windows for less than mainstream candidates.
  • Urban HikerUrban Hiker Posts: 1,312
    dg1979us wrote:
    If you look at Obama, he basically rose from mainstream media attention. Until the 04 convention, nobody had ever heard of him on a national level, and all of a sudden he was a media darling and the future of the democrat party due to one speech.


    Holy shit! It's really nice to see another person point this out. He has been groomed by his party and the media for this election. Without them, he would still be a nobody in a state legislator's office.
    Walking can be a real trip
    ***********************
    "We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
    ***********************
    Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
  • AbookamongstthemanyAbookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    Urban Hiker wrote:
    Holy shit! It's really nice to see another person point this out. He has been groomed by his party and the media for this election. Without them, he would still be a nobody in a state legislator's office.


    Exactly. It's very apparent. What else has he even done to even start gaining the kind of support needed to run for president? What did people like about him in the first place to deserve this kind of media attention? It was that one speech and then he has been the buzz ever since.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • Purple HawkPurple Hawk Posts: 1,300
    respectfully...the fact that we don't have third party's has nothing to do with the media, it has everything to do with single member majority districts.

    if you want third parties, you should check out PR systems....

    any talk of media and the like is childish...trust me, they are on your side.
    And you ask me what I want this year
    And I try to make this kind and clear
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
    Cuz I don't need boxes wrapped in strings
    And desire and love and empty things
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
  • El_KabongEl_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    Exactly. It's very apparent. What else has he even done to even start gaining the kind of support needed to run for president? What did people like about him in the first place to deserve this kind of media attention? It was that one speech and then he has been the buzz ever since.


    he's.....uhhh....given some good speeches and sound bites on the media tour he's been on pretty much since elected...well...does chasing everyone off the ballot really count as being elected?
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • musicismylife78musicismylife78 Posts: 6,116
    its obvious. People like Kucinich, Nader and Paul dont have the media behind them. They dont have ads on tv. They arent aloud to debate, and if they are, the moderators only focus on the front runners.

    2008 has cemented my opinion this is all a farce. Its all about the horserace. Its not about the issues. Obama and Hillary go at it, back and forth, all the while soldiers who are our age, die and are slaughtered in Iraq. Its absurd.

    The whole race was decided before it began. Nader, Kucinich and Paul never had a fair chance. When you are denied the basic right of even DEBATING, things go downhill from there.

    People always say, "nader will never be elected", or "kucinich is great but he isnt electable". Bull crap.

    If people had stood up and said, "we want a candidate who is radical and left wing" we could have elected any of those guys. If we all vote for them, they get elected.

    Far as I am concerned every politician is office sickens me. The Democrats are all spineless wimps, and they expect us to vote for them just because Bush is a evil guy. Hell No. I aint voting for Bush or Mccain, but I sure as hell aint gonna vote for someone just because they have a D next to their name instead of an R.

    to earn my vote you have to show a lifetime of activism. Of standing up and doing the right thing. Of having integrity. That narrows the potential field to 2. Nader and Kucinich
  • Pacomc79Pacomc79 Posts: 9,404
    I think this is fairly well documented since Nixon's loss to Kennedy in the early 60's the first TV election.

    I'm really interested moving foward what the internet and essentially the widespread ability for individual humans to communicate with large numbers of people will do to elections.

    It may not happen for presidential elections especially in the short term, but I guarentee some percentages of populations are better informed to thier ideals because of the internet and it may effect smaller elections.
    My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
  • mammasanmammasan Posts: 5,656
    Well I think we have already started to see a change. Look at Guilliani, all through out the pre-primary season the media had Guilliani pegged as the Republican nominee. If you based your opinion on the elections simply on mainstream media coverage, America's mayor had the presidency all sured up even before the first ballot was cast. How wrong they where. I believe that it was largely do to the younger voters turning to alternative media sources for their information, and Ron Paul making him look like the ass he is on national television. The change has already started and it will take time for the momentum to pick up but younger generations are no longer looking to corporate media outlets for their information they are venturing out and looking for other sources. While my preferred candidate, Paul, will not win the presidency the affects he has had on this years election cannot be denied. His staff was smart enough to use the internet to get his message out and it worked. Hopefully future candidates who do not toe the two party line will follow in his foot steps.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
Sign In or Register to comment.