"Issues" won't matter in the 2008 Presidential race.

[Ron Green]

I was listening to pundits on NPR recently talking about various Presidential contenders of the major parties (only the "popular" ones, of course), and kept waiting for something, anything, about policies, issues or positions taken by any of them. To no avail, of course, because it's all about appeal, personality, poll numbers, resonance with this group or that. I now realize there is absolutely NO place, other than internet sites or blogs, where these things will be discussed, especially during the nominating phase. If NPR or PBS, as the most "high brow" of information sources, can't get beyond this horse-race mentality, the media as a whole are worthless, or harmful to the process.

Is there any reason for optimism?

[bryant69]

1. Well part of that is the early start

But we need to keep working the media - sending in letters to the editor and what not to ensure that the issues get talked about.

The one thing you can take comfort in is that in 2000, the Media savaged Al Gore with nobody saying boo. Now there are organizations and individuals who know the score, who know what the media has done and will do, and are ready to fight.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[TwilightGardener]

2. Issues matter, but only in how they affect a candidates' image.

No one votes for policy papers. We vote for looks, image, and personality.

[EFerrari]

3. Yes, there is. Us.

We are the deciders.

[theoldman]

4. Issues do matter. Most of the time it's money.

In 2000 it was religion not money. In 2004 voters were afraid of changing course during a war. In 2008 the issue will be Iraq.

[PATRICK]

5. What they mean by issues

is the mental gymnastics that Dems waste on working out their positive agenda competitively against each other. Or the simple sloganeering the GOP decides that works this time to deceive the most people.

This is conditioned by the first priority which is image(notably the media definition and presentation) and witty fluff where real traction can be made(not the uncomfortable, boring stuff like war, high treason, bankruptcy and health care). These are priorities the media has chosen. When business gets down to "issues" the judgment of the media(or the public as the media would have everyone take for granted) the lens is already warped.

But when there is an exciting dem personality, just watch. They will get people discussing nothing but issues then, sprinkled "liberally" with the dirt that passes absolutely equally for such things. The focus groups(somewhat stacked) will wax eloquent on health care parsing then get pumped for personality impressions or subtle prejudices created by the GOP. it makes the electorate feel smart and engaged while they get suckered. It preoccupies the Dems with the legislative details that the GOP never ever bothers about(nor about the whopping lies they never back up). issues are critical indeed. It is just their use in our rigged political process that has been welcomed into the general scam when convenient for the GOP smear machine.

The first issue of course is the war and the criminality of Bush Inc. Since the establishment balks totally there, the very idea of health care or farm prices as high priority issues rings more than hollow. The disngenous idea of an open popularity contest, unmindful of the present national outrages, deciding the presidency is obscene. And as long and insofar as the MSM leads the discussion this is the gruel the public is served.

[depakid]

6. "Is there any reason for optimism?"

Not unless Al Gore gets into the race- or, perhaps if there's a strong 3rd party that forces the candidates and especially the corporate media to forcefully deal with the issues.