After listing over twenty of them, I realized that I needed to break the list out a bit, and so below, you have my top annoyances (there are certainly others, and you should share what I missed by hitting the Comment button below). I have them broken out into three buckets: pet peeves of politicians, the media, and of voters/the general populace. I am aware that with most of these, it's focused principally on American politics, so I apologize to TMROJ's international contingent, but I would love to hear which of the below translate into other political systems, so again, the comments!
And without further ado...
Pet Peeves Regarding Politicians
1. Politicians Who Think Voters are Stupid
Oddly enough, I probably have the least pet peeves with politicians. This is perhaps because I have a certain admiration for politicians-not as a whole (they're generally a rather power-hungry bunch for my taste), but because they are typically smart, successful, and I admire that sort of ambition. What I hate, though, is when they pretend we're stupid with talking points. Talking points are the absolute death knell of meaningful discussion in our country, and when someone goes on and on with short, media-friendly soundbytes, it makes me want to gauge my ears out.
I'm going to try really hard to use Democrats and Republicans when giving these examples (because, while I vote exclusively for one, both can drive me batty), but I feel I will fail, and I'm going to prove that by starting out with a Republican: Mitt Romney. All I heard after Romney lost was that the reason that Latino and Hispanic voters didn't go for him and the GOP was that they didn't understand his message. Not only is this wildly condescending, it's categorically false. In an election that billions of dollars were spent on advertising and commercials, we all knew exactly what both candidates wanted us to know. If voters didn't like the message that's one thing, but they clearly understood it.
3. Politicians Who Don't Tell You What They Would Do in Office
Of my politician examples, this is certainly the most grating, and you hear it all the time. They'll say, "I'll explain that plan more once I get in office" or pivot when asked about their goals in office and instead go back to negatively campaigning against their opponent. The absolute worst is when they're running for Congress, and Congress is voting on a bill and they won't answer how they would vote (this happens more often than you'd think). You're trying to be in Congress-how you would act in office is the definition of relevant to the voters!!!
4. Politicians Who Apologize for Something They Just Said and Clearly Meant
This isn't just politicians-it's also celebrities who go on diatribes on Twitter or even people in real life who say something heinous and say "I was just kidding; learn to take a joke." If you compare the President to Hitler or call the Republican leader a moron or say the ACA is the worst thing to happen to this country since the Great Depression, you clearly meant to say that. A slip-of-the-tongue is accidentally swearing while on the phone with your mother. This is a fully-thought out sentence. That you didn't want people to hear it or that you didn't want them to interpret it that way is a completely different thing, but you clearly meant it. Be a leader and own what you said.
Pet Peeves Regarding Political Media
1. Using the phrase "Race of their life"
This is the grammar tyrant in me coming out, but what you mean to say is this is a race FOR their political life. You can't be in the race of your political life every single cycle, but yet every time that John Barrow or Mary Landrieu is running for re-election, this phrase is thrown around like a Miranda Priestley handbag.
2. Pundits Who Predict Elections Immediately After the Last One
I wanted to punch my television the night Obama won reelection, not because he won (I voted for him, and was happy), but because suddenly names like Rand Paul, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Marco Rubio were all being talked about as if the last election had meant nothing. Part of the reason (in fact, in my opinion, one of the big reasons) we don't get enough done in Washington is that the media focuses too much on the future and not enough on the present. Talking about upcoming races is sexy, but focusing on the politicians we have already elected makes more sense.
3. Lack of Fact-Checking
I am aware that FOX News skews to the Republicans and MSNBC skews to the Democrats and CNN is kind of the older spinster sibling that no one will ever marry, but they are all supposed to be news channels. Make sure that you're actually checking the statements of politicians for errors-that's your job. It's not just to report a soundbyte and be a politician delivery service-that's what retweeting is for. So important do I think this point is, the next two are going to be related.
You know the best moment in the presidential debates? It was the moment that Candy Crowley declared that Governor Romney was incorrect in his statement about President Obama. It wasn't awesome because Romney looked like an idiot as a result; it was awesome because Crowley did her job of holding politicians accountable to the truth. While opinions are subjective, the truth (such as what a person specifically said or how they voted) is absolute, and both can be used to make sure the public is getting answers and information from a politician.
For an example of a journalist who didn't follow Crowley's lead, this past summer, John Oliver was interviewing Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (ha-Democratic example!), a potential presidential candidate and a rising star in the Democratic Party, about her campaign contributions. Gillibrand has received huge amounts of donations from Wall Street, and Oliver wanted to know what those campaign donations bought the donors-this is a superb question, and one that was worth asking. Gillibrand, a skilled politician, gave a pivot answer about wanting to take the corporate money out of politics, but Oliver didn't press her on his original inquiry. Part of this is because Oliver wants to stay in the good graces of a candidate who could someday be a major ratings draw, but because he didn't have the guts to go after Gillibrand, the public won't know the answer to his topical question.
5. The Media's Treatment of Gadfly Politicians
This is a double-sided coin, and not one that is always easy to decipher. On the one hand, I do feel that the media gives way too much airtime to someone like Christine O'Donnell, who still gets public appearances despite being a multiple-time statewide loser who has never held a significant office. However, I also feel like there is an eye-rolling whenever someone like Louie Gohmert or Michele Bachmann speak, which is an issue, because these people are sitting members of Congress. They represent hundreds of thousands of people in the House and vote on all of the federal laws that are enacted in this country. I sometimes feel like the media goes too light on them because everyone considers them to be "jokes," but these jokes have more political power than 99.99% of the country. The media should take them to task fervently if they are still in office and are making abhorrent or nonsensical statements, and should hold their leadership accountable if they let them get away with it without repercussions.
Pet Peeves About Regular People Discussing Politics
There are so many reasons I hate this sentiment, I cannot even see straight. While, yes, there are certain issues where most politicians do agree regardless of party label (Wall Street regulations and campaign finance come to mind, but even then there's a lot of philosophical argument), as a whole, there is an enormous divide between the two parties on virtually every major issue: the economy, defense, health care, gay marriage, women's rights, the death penalty, the environment, science, education, voting rights, the judiciary-the list is virtually endless. Things like ambition, greed, and corruption may cross party lines with too much frequency, but the issues are what ultimately matters, and there's SO MUCH difference between the two parties when it comes to this.
I'll go a step further-I think statements like these are one of the main reasons we're in the dire straights that we are in as a country. People who are either too lazy or too ignorant to learn about politics and what impact their vote has by simply disregarding the entire system have made it possible for far left and far right groups to take over the conversation of American politics, because if politicians see the only people genuinely paying attention are the far right or far left, that's who they're going to cater toward.
2. People Who Think Term Limits are the Answer
Term limits are idiotic, and here's why. Unless you're talking about a permanent position like a judge or an appointed position like a cabinet secretary (I disagree with term limits for either of those, but I can see your point at least with them), every politician in this country has to face the voters in order to get into office or stay in office. If you don't like a politician, every major partisan office in this country has some sort of primary system and some sort of general election system. We all have a choice whether a politician will stay or go. You might be a Utah Democrat or a Rhode Island Republican who is frustrated your candidate always loses, but that's the way democracy works. If you want to win, find more voters for your candidate. There's a plethora of them out there, which brings me to...
3. People Who Only Vote in Presidential Elections
People who don't vote are everyone's pet peeve-unless you can't vote for a legal issue or aren't old enough to vote, we all know that "you have no right to complain if you don't participate." I take that one step further though-if you're only voting every four years, and are ignoring the midterms and the off-year city council, mayoral, and local elections, then you can't complain either. It's not just the president who makes the decisions.
4. People Who Cannot Figure Out Checks and Balances
I'm finding some solid segways here. The president is not a dictator (despite what you might have read on Free Republic this morning) and can rarely act unilaterally. People who see the President and assume that if something cannot pass, it must be his fault are missing the big picture. Thanks to the country electing a Democratic White House and Senate and a Republican House, little is done because the checks are doing their job. And once someone understands that, they'll further see the importance of the midterm elections, which decide who runs two thirds of this checks-system.
5. People Who Say They're Independents
This is a small pet peeve, but one we all know is pretty true. Saying I'm a "moderate" or a "maverick" also is a bit annoying, but those can technically be accurate of people, so I'll let them slide. People who say they're independent bug me for two reasons. One, almost all of the time they tend to favor one party over the other, but just want to sound middle-of-the-road and socially acceptable, trying to avoid the political baggage that comes with the label of Democrat or Republican. And two, because these people don't usually have a solution for the two-party system. At least the Greens or the Libertarians have a fully-formed political ideology that would govern their voting in Congress. But an Independent just relies on platitudes and cliches, and there's already enough of that in politics.
6. People Who are Naive about Winning
Unfounded hope is something we're all susceptible to from time-to-time, whether it's in politics or when you give that crazy hot waiter your number despite the fact that you're still carrying holiday weight and are wearing orange sweatpants. Occasionally a Heidi Heitkamp or a Jim Matheson pull off the miracle on Election Night, and that's all well-and-good. But for the most part, South Dakotan Democrats who think they'll beat an incumbent Republican are just fooling themselves. I am all for getting out the vote, but when you have to say "the only poll that matters is the one on Election Day," that's the same thing as saying "we're about to lose."
I'm not going to sit on this blog and tell you I agree with everything a specific Democrat did or something that the entire party believes (there are issues where I'm very much against their beliefs). But what I won't do is complain about something I knew that they would do when I voted for them. I'll shop around in the primary for a viable candidate who supports all of the issues that I support and will be irate when they go back on a campaign promise, but if you vote for a candidate you know won't do what you want in office, you deserve what's coming to you. A classic example of this, for those who aren't sure what I'm talking about, is the gay Republican. Gay people have every right to choose to vote based on an issue other than one affecting their sexual orientation, but it's hard to feel sympathy when you vote for an anti-same sex marriage candidate and then are shocked when he or she sticks by that promise in office.
8. People Who Think Talking About Politics is Impolite
I ended on this one on purpose, of course, because I'm aware that there may be a lot of disagreement with some of the above statements (either you see yourself in some of them or you just disagree). To that I say, "let's hear it." Because talking, educating, reacting, arguing-these are all healthy things to do. At the end of the day, I want to support your choices at the polls and you want to support mine-we may not disagree, but we both want what's best for each other. And if you shoo away conversations about politics (or sex or disease or mental illness or any number of other equally taboo topics) then you take away the opportunity to educate and grow. And that's a pet peeve we all should have.
Those are my pet peeves, but I'm dying to here yours. What are your political pet peeves? What did I miss? And what did you disagree with? Share in the comments!
No comments:
Post a Comment