Yesterday, for some reason, the topic came to elections. She said “I voted for Bush not because of his politics - I think Kerry might actually be better and smarter. But I think Mrs. Kerry should never live in the White House. Mrs. Bush is a Lady, and she deserves it”.
Now, this reasoning is just wrong. Vote for political reasons, not for you think is the nicest old lady. I don’t care who you vote for, this statement would be wrong with role-reversal as well. To base the vote on who the First Lady is is just wrong on so many levels.
Pit her for putting ladylike looks before her political opinion!
Sure, it’s silly. But is is a symptom of just one more thing the Kerry campaign had going against it.
I don’t think Teresa Heinz Kerry did her husband any favors at all. An awful lot of people took a look at her, and were not favorably impressed. Laura Bush, on the other hand, was a terrific campaigner, and did an awful lot to win the race.
I don’t for one second think Teresa was as bad as her public image would suggest. I’m from Pittsburgh, and I’ve met her from time to time, mostly when John Heinz was still alive. She’s a decent sort, absolutely devoted to Pittsburgh and its people, and she demonstrates this through her considerable charity. Her politics aren’t mine, but as was pointed out, she wasn’t on the ballot.
Perceptions do matter in politics, however, and the impression she left on the American public wasn’t a good one. That’s a bit of a harsh statement for a decent and gracious person, but it’s the truth.
My mom voted for Bush for the exact same reason. “I’m not voting for that “Larry” fellow because his wife is such a bitch.” :smack: Why can’t we have at least some sort of qualifications for voters, like maybe knowing the names of the candidates???
I blame the media and the black-hole known as Karl Rove. They are masters of slander and mud-slinging.
Mrs. Heinz-Kerry would have made an incredible first lady. She wasn’t bound by what most Americans are - not being able to see beyond our borders. It’s an unfortunate thing that the majority suffer from. We are NOT the world, the rest of the world does not think the same way we do. She is a feisty, spirited woman who was not afraid to speak her mind, and being similar in personality I loved that about her.
The same thing happened to Dean. Og-forbid someone show some damn emotion, then they’re “crazy”. What is this world coming to? Correction - this country. It’s sickening and I am deeply, utterly DISGUSTED with that mentality. Bush can misspeak, mispronounce, and be a shining example of public humiliation and nothing happens.
People better wake the fuck up. To be blind to this hypocracy is reprehensible. I thought we as Americans were better than that, I guess not. We are evil people who will step on whoever to get ahead.
I love Teresa Heinz-Kerry, in fact, I liked her better than her husband. But then, I’m one of those ballsy bitches who doesn’t shut up, so I can relate.
And, I do think she’s very ladylike, not that that should have anything to do with her living in the White House.
It’s obscene the way people make their choices. I don’t care if a candidate’s wife is the biggest cunt on Earth, that’s no reason to damage myself by voting for somebody who won’t represent my interests.
They should immediately discontinue those “Get Out And Vote” campaigns and replace them with “Don’t be a goddamn idiot and vote for whose wife makes the best cookies. Learn the candiates positions and vote for who you think will best serve the country. Fucking moron.” Shitty bumper sticker I guess, but makes more sense.
How much of the perception was left by her and how much of it came from the pundits? I have a feeling Theresa could have been Mother Theresa, and people still would have found a way to be bothered by her.
A little while ago we had a couple of threads on the importance of the character of the President. I think this also applies to the spouse. For example look at Bill and Hillary Clinton and what happenned in his first term as Governor. She acted up and Bill lost next time around. She learned her lesson thereafter.
Should it be the sole criterion? Absolutely not, but I think it’s important, as does the nice old lady, though to a much greater degree.
So someone voted for Bush based on feelings toward Theresa? Take heart in knowing some Kerry voter cancelled that vote for likely an equally “invalid” reason.
I wonder if anyone knows how to poll the ACLU and the SPLC to see if testing would be supported in determining voter eligibility.
Possibly, and it also probably equals out over at multiple elections. For example, I was happy that Clinton beat Dole, because his politics were closer to mine than Dole’s, but I have no doubt Clinton got a lot of vote from idiots who’s views were closer to Dole’s, but didn’t vote for Dole because he was much less telegenic.
Clinton didn’t lose his 2nd term because of Hillary. He lost it because of the Cuban refugee issue and his arrogance in dealing with some of the political leaders in Arkansas during his first term.
Perhaps the fact that she kept her maiden name, etc. raised a few eyebrows, but that’s about it.
Yup, that one little old lady represents the 51% of those bothering to vote.
FUCK! We’ve been found out! :smack: :smack: :smack:
Well, since the truth is out, can we all just send her to vote in '08? It’ll free up the time of about 50 million people to stay at work and keep the country’s economy humming. (Unless the Clinton’s are involved. Then “humming” will have to be substituted with another word)
My neighbor is an alcoholic who is usually too drunk to walk straight. On election day, another neighbor drove him to vote. Later the drunk guy showed me a card he’d somehow gotten from the Republicans telling exactly how to vote on each choice, which he did. He asked me what the constitutional amendment was all about – it was the anti-same sex marriage amendment, which passed by 86% here in Mississippi. The drunk voted “yes” like the card told him to, even though he had no idea what it was.
