jpgray
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-30-07 10:08 PM
Original message |
What would the presidential candidate field look like if image wasn't a primary consideration? |
|
Essentially all the news media coverage focuses on image today, a quality that journalists are ironically just as qualified as you or I to interpret. Of course no election has been wholly free of image-based caricatures of candidates (I remember a Civil War letter describing Lincoln as "not so bad-looking as they say!"), but how do you think it would impact the field? I think Kucinich would benefit the most, though his ideas would still be subject to attack based on stereotypes of socialism and economic plans unfriendly to corporations.
|
TwilightGardener
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-30-07 10:11 PM
Response to Original message |
1. It's hard to say--image is very important. Usually |
|
the person who is the most Presidential-looking wins. This is why Mittens has a decent shot. He looks Presidential, before he even opens his mouth--that's an amazing advantage.
|
jpgray
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-30-07 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. That's why I just ask what might happen if it weren't a -primary- consideration |
|
Edited on Thu Aug-30-07 10:12 PM by jpgray
It's impossible to even quantify how much image affects our views on their policy, speaking skills, etc.
|
Adsos Letter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Aug-30-07 10:22 PM
Response to Original message |
3. ...Me... with my eldest daughter as VP ... |
|
...and my youngest daughter as SOS. Actually, they could past the image test...
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 09:49 AM
Response to Original message |