Re: The value of ambivalence in the democratic process. As I’ve watched the abundant coverage of the primaries on CNN, a theme has emerged, on both sides of the electorate, that of “enthusiasm”. While certainly important in turning out the vote in the final elections, it is a misguided notion to interpret ambivalence toward a candidate in the formative stages of the cycle as a harbinger, or worse as a final judgment, on their ultimate elect-ability. It is only an expression of the electorate’s dissatisfaction verses an ideal nominee and, in fact, the more enthusiastic the following a particular primary contender has at the outset the less likely he is to gain market share. Ambivalence is a cue to the contestant that, while he is not repellant, he is acceptable and IF HE CONTINUES TO REFINE HIS MESSAGE, may be able to garner enthusiasm at some later date. If a participant already has a ready following, he is unlikely to change to garner more votes and also to not disappoint his base, so he is doubly disadvantaged. The obvious personifications of this theory are Mitt Romney and Ron Paul. What will be Romney’s undoing is the embrace of the ultimately unpopular that the Republicans are fixated on: undoing “Obamacare” (polling at 70+% approval), changing Medicare and Social Security (always polling at 70+% approval), promoting a supply-side solution to a demand-deficient economy and the generally fascist nature of their social views. Even if Romney were to be elected with this format, the unpopularity of these ideas would ultimately cause them to fail in the legislature as even a Republican Congress would bail on this in favor of reelection. The mistake the RNC is making is failing to differentiate between dissatisfaction with the rapidity of change in the Obama administration and the change itself. If the economy continues to improve, no republican will have a snowball’s chance in Hell (even if Obama doesn’t alter his views a bit) and that is the RNC’s fault. But Obama senses the ambivalence of the electorate towards him, is already moving towards them, and the spread continues to grow… Wisconsin wonder-boy Reince Preibus, huh? How’s that working out?
Makes me wonder who came in second.
Oh, Erin: (A) No one outside New York plays squash, we go out in the sun and play tennis. (B) I noticed a request last night for your backhand ”flick”, which you dutifully performed. Among tennis players the backhand stroke is referred to as the “pimphand” in honor of Easy E (see: ”Boys in da Hood” line “She started talkin’ shi_, wouldn’t ya know, I reached back like a pimp and I smacked the ’ho…”) Hope you find this information useful.
And always keep your pimphand strong (like I even have to tell you that).
Makes me wonder who came in second.
Oh, Erin: (A) No one outside New York plays squash, we go out in the sun and play tennis. (B) I noticed a request last night for your backhand ”flick”, which you dutifully performed. Among tennis players the backhand stroke is referred to as the “pimphand” in honor of Easy E (see: ”Boys in da Hood” line “She started talkin’ shi_, wouldn’t ya know, I reached back like a pimp and I smacked the ’ho…”) Hope you find this information useful.
And always keep your pimphand strong (like I even have to tell you that).
