Is campaign rhetoric purposefully used to avoid addressing the real political issues the American people want answers to?

2016-04-01T08:03:59-04:00

Response by SP5 Mark Kuzinski made Apr 1 at 2016 8:09 AM

2016-04-01T08:09:25-04:00

Thanks for the post.

Response by PO2 Mark Saffell made Apr 1 at 2016 8:09 AM

2016-04-01T08:09:35-04:00

Lets see how can I answer this question. HELL YESSSS

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Apr 1 at 2016 8:14 AM

2016-04-01T08:14:43-04:00

Good question, but that would depend on what those issues are. If your issue is Hillary and her server, that might be as important as Trump and his derogatory view of women, or Bernies idea of free damn near everything, or Cruz discovering he was a citizen of Canada right before he declares he's running for President. Too many issues, and no one person will have all of the same as the next.

Response by SPC David S. made Apr 1 at 2016 9:28 AM

2016-04-01T09:28:07-04:00

That's a good question - as politicians get asked all sorts of questions you might wonder just how many they answer as apposed to all the times they just ramble on about the question and not really give an answer even if the question is a simple 'yes' or 'no'. They'll talk about the issues around the question like this question - is it because they don't know the answer or they're not sure how to answer it without making themselves look bad. The amazing part is that after they circumvent answering the question they'll add the usual - "did that answer your question' as to come to an agreement 'I can keep doing this if that's what you want'. But babies are cute when you're wearing a nice suit. Did that answer your question?

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2016 9:36 AM

2016-04-01T09:36:56-04:00

No. These politicians know the average American is an entertainment junkie. We have our faces stuck in our electronic devices seeking a constant flow of drama. If we could put that stuff in an IV we would. Politicians have always avoided or danced around real issues. The rhetoric is designed to entertain us. And we will vote for the most amusing candidate rather than the most qualified.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Apr 1 at 2016 9:44 AM

2016-04-01T09:44:42-04:00

Define "real political issues".

Response by MSgt Michael Smith made Apr 1 at 2016 9:56 AM

2016-04-01T09:56:38-04:00

Yes. Absolutely. The reality is that 1) High-paying jobs for low-skilled workers are gone forever. 2) Demographics in America are changing dramatically and will continue to change at an ever-increasing pace until Hispanics outnumber Whites. 3) Gay Marriage and GLBT rights are just going to get better and more fair. 4) Abortion is not going anywhere. 5) Obamacare is here to stay, even if it is named something else. You CANNOT stop cultural shift. I wish people could understand this. Culture is a force that is unstoppable, and you can never turn it back without eliminating the source of the shift. Since the source of the cultural shift is the population, then you CANNOT stop it!

Response by Lt Col Timothy Parker, DBA made Apr 1 at 2016 10:18 AM

2016-04-01T10:18:22-04:00

In my humble opinion, they essentially have little choice barring those who have served in someone President's cabinet. For example, the GOP candidates don't have a feel for how the real system works, what's really achievable, and how other countries may respond to our actions. Pres. Obama promised troop withdrawals by a given date as a candidate - once in office, he learned what is real and doable.

Candidates make promises that in reality they may not be able to keep, but make them because the general public hear what they want to hear. Will Trump be able to build the wall on the border - I doubt it. Will he send back 3 million illegal immigrants - I doubt it. Will Sanders turn the country into a socialist state - I doubt it.

In the end, it's up to the public (each of us) to determine what (and who) is real, what is in the best interest of America as a country (and not just your personal life), and get educated on all that matters. Otherwise, you may get what you ask (vote) for.

Just my humble opinion.

Response by LCpl Mark Lefler made Apr 1 at 2016 10:34 AM

2016-04-01T10:34:51-04:00

I think they're afraid to give their position on certain things because they do not want to appear polarizing to others and losing voting blocks.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2016 10:58 AM

2016-04-01T10:58:21-04:00

One needs to understand a couple of things.
A major political candidate has a stump speech full of stuff that they give over and over, often multiple times a day. It becomes a part of them, and when they're talking in front of people, that is their default setting. It was no different when Senator Cruz had a Q&A here on RP. I have to say, I was very disappointed by that.
Once in a while, a candidate goes "off script" and gives an off the cuff answer. VP Biden was notorious for this, as is Trump. Colloquially labeled a "gaff", political candidates have scores of minions to go along behind them and "clarify" their comments. In Trump's case, it is pretty clear it is purposeful in order to dominate the news cycle. IMOP opinion, he might have finally stepped in it in a way that will torpedo his campaign with the abortion comments and some of the other items that have come up this week. Conventional wisdom was that it would happen sooner in the process that he'd screw up and lose support. It remains to be seen if this is politically fatal, but my money is on yes.

Response by PO3 Steven Sherrill made Apr 1 at 2016 11:02 AM

2016-04-01T11:02:50-04:00

Sgt Joe LaBranche ABSOLUTELY!!!

If the candidates were not so busy talking about why the other people are the wrong choice, trying to get people into an emotional response by talking about highly divisive issues (gun control, religion, abortion, equality), then they would have to talk about policy. As I do not think most of these people have an idea of what policy changes they truly want to push for, nor do they have an idea how to make that push, they would rather push the rhetoric.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Apr 1 at 2016 11:19 AM

2016-04-01T11:19:46-04:00

I think most political candidates take courses on how to evade the true subject, dig dirt on others, avoid the main subject and beat around the bush to avoid talking about true subjects. Kind of like doctors take courses in sloppy writing!

Just think what would happen if real subject and real problems were directly addressed?

Response by SGT Michael Thorin made Apr 1 at 2016 1:18 PM

2016-04-01T13:18:48-04:00

PO3 Steven Sherrill hit the nail on the head.

Further more, debates are not geared towards issues, they follow the rules of reality TV; do everything you can to incite a fight.

From what I can see, every politician tries to get the voters to believe they can relate to and understand the plight of the common man.

I think it's a slap in the face for a politician to say they understand the plight of the "common man."

That is a phrase that I hate, "the common man."

English Kings and Lords called the people they ruled over "commoners" and the "common."

That subtly implies that politicians are "uncommon" which implies "rulers."

In a psychological sense, people hearing daily that they are "common" subconsciously leads them to believe the politicians are the rulers, which is not the way our government is supposed to operate.

The only thing that should make politicians "uncommon" is the fact that they should obey the will of the people.

The "average American" is another term that I hate for politicians to use.

The "average American" no longer exists. When 3% of the population of the United States can have laws overturned which have existed in our Country which have existed for decades, even centuries, despite the fact that 97% of the population does not, yo can no longer claim that your government is for "the people," it has now become a government which caves to individuals, placing the good of the society as a whole prison to the wishes of a few.

Bit off topic, but wanted to get it off my chest.

Response by COL Ted Mc made Apr 1 at 2016 2:07 PM

2016-04-01T14:07:38-04:00

Sgt Joe LaBranche - Sergeant; I don't think that it as much "avoiding answering the real issues" as it is "avoiding proving that you don't know what to do about the real issues".

If you can ever find a politician who has not only goals but a concrete plan to achieve those goals, then you are going to be very surprised.

Semantically most "campaign promises" translate into the equivalent of "We are going to improve American education by improving American education." (with absolutely no definitions being given for "we", "improve", "American", or "education").

Response by SSG James Arlington made Apr 1 at 2016 2:42 PM

2016-04-01T14:42:14-04:00

We can't handle the truth.

Response by SSG Trevor S. made Apr 1 at 2016 3:16 PM

2016-04-01T15:16:43-04:00

Of course.

Response by Maj John Bell made Apr 1 at 2016 4:41 PM

2016-04-01T16:41:07-04:00

Now pay attention to my left hand. Don't worry about what is going on with my right hand. Now back to my left hand.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Apr 1 at 2016 5:13 PM

2016-04-01T17:13:01-04:00

Spin, Spin and more Spin. Like the Title of a movie once said "An Inconvenient Truth". People would rather hear what they want to hear.

Response by SGT Bill Stockell made Apr 7 at 2016 5:15 PM

2016-04-07T17:15:42-04:00

I don't think they (R's & D's) know or care about them. They are just in get elected mode. They certainly aren't going to touch the limited term issues, which should be at the top of everyone's pile.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2016 10:42 PM

2016-04-11T22:42:12-04:00

Yes, and to placate to the base nature of humanity.