Why I hate politics

I watched part of the debate on Tuesday.

I'm an undecided voter, and the debate certainly didn't help me decide who to vote for. In fact, I kind of don't want to vote for either of them. The candidates just talked over one another and spoke in partial truths and vague accusations. Romney kept saying, "When the president took office, he promised such and such and he hasn't kept those promises." Come on Mitt, really? I wonder how many presidents actually keep all their promises. A lot can happen in four years. If Mitt's elected, I doubt he'll live up to all of his promises. The last question of the debate asked about misconceptions of the candidates. Both candidates used the time to bash on their opponent.

This is exactly why I hate politics. You have these two political parties, and once someone claims their allegiance to one, they turn into mindless robots who support every measure their party supports. What's worse, they will attack any measure the opposite party supports, even if they otherwise might agree with it. People may have particular reasons for adhering to a party. Some may stick to a party because it is a family tradition. Others might stick to a party precisely because it is not a family tradition. The problem is not with the parties themselves; the problem lies with sacrificing your reasoning to other people and having them tell you what you should believe and do.

If I were to generalize the Republican Party, it would be that they are ignorant. If they hear facts that disagree with their party, they put their fingers in their ears and deny the facts. I think the quintessential example of this is global warming. They can't bear to think that we have a problem, so they pretend it doesn't exist. (I wrote a blog post back in April that goes into more detail about my views on the matter.)

If I were to generalize the Democratic Party, it would be that they like to characterize others as being bigoted and hateful, but in so doing they themselves are even more so. A recent example of this is the Chic-Fil-A incident. The owner of a restaurant chain expresses his opinion about gay marriage. Suddenly the country is in an uproar, and everyone is accusing him of being hateful because of his opinion. I do think that there are a lot of opponents of gay marriage who are bigoted and homophobic. But I think there are a lot of opponents of it who have other reasons for opposing it, none of which are homophobic. Automatically saying he is hateful because of his view seems just as hateful to me. It's as if you're saying, "You can believe whatever you want, as long as it agrees with me." Some people even went as far as to say that his restaurants were unwelcome in their cities. What do chicken sandwiches have to do with marriage? Following the incident, a lot of people ate at his restaurant in support of him. And once again, Democrats were labeling these patrons as hateful. But in this case I don't think the reason people supported him was because of the marriage issue. They supported him because America should be a place where we can express our opinions. So automatically accusing everyone of being intolerant seems very intolerant to me. Remember when gay marriage advocates graffitied Mormon temples after Proposition 8? How is that tolerant? (By the way, I'm not trying to say whether gay marriage is right or wrong. I'm simply saying that it is irrational to assume someone is hateful because they happen to disagree with you.)

Now, I realize that in making these generalizations, I'm being just as bad as the behaviors I'm condemning. And I recognize some might say I'm intolerant for saying that Democrats are intolerant for saying that Republicans are intolerant. I do realize that these perceptions are shaped by a very vocal minority. But because these minorities are so vocal, they have the potential to drag more people into their robotic organizations.

These irrational ties to party lines lead people to deplorable and childish behavior. People begin making unfounded accusations. Remember how Romney doesn't pay his taxes and how Obama is a Muslim born outside of the U.S.?

Other times people will take something and blow it out of proportion. Take the "you didn't build that" thing. The Republicans blew that out of proportion. If Romney had said it, they wouldn't have reacted. And take Romney's remarks about women on Tuesday night. I watched that, and I didn't find it misogynic. Maybe I didn't catch it because I'm not a woman, but I feel like the Democrats jumped on it because it was Romney who said and not Obama. And if Obama had said it, then the Republicans would be all over him.

Sometimes people will take something that is neither good nor bad but they will turn it into something bad. Mitt Romney is rich. So what? Well, he doesn't understand middle classes. That just sounds like an excuse for turning richness into a bad thing. Some people have been very adamant about how Mitt Romney said students should borrow money from their parents, therefore he doesn't understand the middle class. Um, I'm a middle class student, and I get help from my parents. I realize that not everyone has that opportunity, but I don't think Romney was insinuating that that's an option for everyone. It's just one possible suggestion out of many.

Good grief, if I were running for president, I'd have all sorts of ridiculous things said to oppose me:
"Governor Melville believes we should dip criminals in boiling oil."
"Governor Melville is a Mormon. Isn't that reason enough not to vote for him?"
"Mr. Melville is a descendant of Puritanical Pilgrims and Mormon pioneers. How can he understand a minority?"
"In high school, Melville claimed he was a werewolf. Do you want a deranged individual running our country?"
"How can someone who doesn't watch popular TV shows know what's going on in the world?"
"Mr. Melville has Snoopy on his pajamas!"

Then there's the effects party lines have had on the candidates themselves. Mitt Romney has changed his mind (or at least appears to) many times in order to align himself with the Republican Party, instead of sticking with what he really believes to be right. I can only hope that if he gets elected, he will switch back to what he knows to be right, not what the party tells him to--if he can switch once, surely he can switch again. I also think Obama has done similar things. Our corrupt party system has led candidates to believe that catering to their voters is more important than sticking up for what is right.

I would also like to point out some additional unfounded attacks this season, ones that are directed against Obama. One of these relates to gas prices. The highest I can ever remember gas prices was the summer of 2008, when gas was nearly $5 a gallon in East Wenatchee, WA. That was before Obama even got elected.

The other is kind of related, and that is that the economy hasn't gotten better. I could understand if you said that Obama perhaps didn't do enough for the economy, or else he went about it the wrong way. I don't know if these would be accurate statements, but I could understand how you might make them. But I do know that the economy has gotten better. How do I know this? Simple observation.

During my first year at BYU, I was searching for jobs. I applied to jobs all over the place. The BYU job listings page was only two or three pages long, even during spring. It was four pages on a good day. Once I saw a job listing on the board in the Wilk, so I immediately went to the library to submit an electronic application. While I was in the process of filling out the application, the position was filled, even though it was only posted that morning. I got so desperate that I even applied at the MTC. But I couldn't find a Provo job, so I took fall semester off in order to live at home and find a job. For two months I applied to jobs right and left. I applied to every job I felt qualified for, and even some I knew I wasn't qualified for. I applied to stores, restaurants, warehouses, and other businesses. Out of all the dozens of applications I submitted, I only got a few interviews, and I didn't get those jobs. It took me two months before I finally got a job. (In hindsight, I'm grateful the job market was the way it was, because I got a really good job that I wouldn't have even thought of if I hadn't been desperate. It was so good that I went back there last year, and sometimes I miss it even now. But just because it worked out for me doesn't mean the job market was good.)

Two years later, I know the job market is better. BYU's job listings currently take up five pages and it's the middle of the semester, and five pages is actually pretty low compared to what it usually is. But five pages is still better than it was over two years ago. I also keep getting emails from Sears (apparently one of the stores I applied to) about my application from two years ago! Unfortunately for them, but fortunately for me, I have a better job now. So I know the economy has gotten better.

But I still don't know who I'm going to vote for. My consolation, however, is that with the way the electoral college works, it doesn't matter who I vote for anyway.