gedavis.com
campaign 2024
gedavis.com |
campaign 2024 |
||
| campaigning effectively: demophilic genuineness in the fair election gary e. davis |
September 3, 2024 |
|---|
There’s a stark contrast between Harris and the real estate salesman on trustworthiness. Biden’s politics has been very much about re-instituting trustworthiness in national government. This importance is integral to one’s worthiness for elected office. Harris’s orientation by the presence of others (expressed by a career serving the rights of victims) is inspiring and obviously authentic. (Authentic life is the basis for genuineness of interaction, I’ve argued.) When such genuine orientation by the other is scaled to general political life, we have demophilia. Small scale political campaigning seeks to establish (or support) a claim to genuine demophilia. I noted at an X posting July 7 that “We need political leadership with highly trustworthy authority which is widely recognizable by voters. Unfortunately, dissociative voters commonly want thrill.” (I said “sexiness,” but the point was consumers wanting an enterainment: political life as a good show.) Diverse lives likely feel that political, generally-public, life is distant, maybe partly due to tendencies of systemic concerns (“public sphere” as statistically-discerned population management) to conceal lived experience: the prevailing importance of one’s own family (rather than being an instance of demographic variables), intimacies, friendship, local solidarities, and lived issues of local, intersectional civil life. Ordinary life may have immanent concerns about neighborhood and community, but likely not about interrelations of governmental levels, let alone meritocratic standards relative to evolving relevances of public policy. Settled feeling toward a candidate is one’s “good reason” to vote one’s preference; so, campaigns’ incessant polling seeks to calibrate what likely appeals. The gen- uine candidacy (with transparent interests) is forced into instrumental thinking as much as the phony candidacy (whose instrumentality is instrumentalist, i.e., duplicitous: serving concealed interests). For the ordinary voter, “intuition” is “valid” because it’s compelling enough to give the person a prefernece, pre-reflectively or by casual attention to information—or casual experience of the political atmospherics of multimedial marketing—which is enough to give the time-constrained voter (no thanks to the stress of an underpaid job) cohernece enough to have a distinct opinion. Then, a consumer citizen can vote for whatever reason they prefer (or no reason at all). Liberty to vote doesn’t require astute appreciation of the importance of truly good reason and sense of fairness which belongs to political freedom in democratic thought. There’s no way that pollsters can gauge the distribution of actual reasons for voting, except in far retrospect relative to quantifiable criteria (typical “reasons”). So, the pollsters have to resort to emergent trends relative to easily distinguish- able traits like party identification, expressed likelihood to vote, ethnicity, interest in prominent issues, etc. July 7, while Biden was still the candidate and was at the NATO meeting, I com- mented at a Washington Post article that…… Unfortunately, the uncertain voter isn't focused on global leadership, though that's crucial to the long-term prosperity of U.S. folks, a complex story in a political atmosphere of impression management and freedom to vote for spurious reasons (or by impulse—Trump's approach to everything).In our dreams. next—> progressive politics as pragmatic transcending |
| Be fair. © 2024, gary e. davis |