Daily Agitator
We have all heard since about the last of February of this year just how angry the American people are with Washington….that the American people are sick of the Washington insiders running the country into the ground. We also have been told by the media especially, that this year was going to be the anti-incumbent year, that incumbents will have a difficult time explaining themselves to the electorate and that they could be in considerable re-election trouble.
I guess that I fell victim to this sort of thinking and reporting because I have watched our country go to crap at the hands of our elected officials…I have seen all the anger in the Tea Party protests…the anger on the radio….the anger within the different parties and their struggle to define themselves to the people.
But are the American people really as angry as they are telling us? So far in this mid-term election season there has been at least 300 primaries and run-off elections and out of those elections only 7 non-incumbents have won their races. Does that sound like the anti-incumbent feeling is truly taking hold?
Granted the general election in November may prove the anti-incumbent anger to be true….but as it is today does not look too good for any substantial change in Washington. Americans will once again be trading one insider for another….and nothing will change…….normal American politics.
Um, the MSM (and the Democrat Party, like Ms. Pelosi) have been pushing the rhetoric that it is an “anti-incumbent” anger.
That is simply not true.
It’s an anti-progressive-policy anger.
If an incumbent is campaigning on a platform of fiscal responsibility…he’ll be much more likely voted back into office than the new guy promising to increase government at the expense of the taxpayer.
It seems that you are right….but it also seems that ALL MSM and that will include all cable also, has been pushing some form of anger on the people. The problem for me is that some of the ones winning their primaries are fiscally responsible only at election time once that is over they go back to the same spending that has been in the Congress since 1994 or so.
Sometimes it’s the choice between a rock and a hard place. And sometimes it’s a vote for Paul Ryan again despite the fact that he and his fellow conservatives, being minorities in Congress for the last two years, weren’t capable of doing much.
I have covered that point before…….I do not think that you should have to vote for the worse of two candidates or should I say the less offensive….promises are easy and seldom are upheld once elected….it was so with Clinton, both Bushes and Obama and I doubt if the next one will be any better.