It is amazing what thoughts come to you at three in the morning. I awoke from a very strange dream and posed the following hypothetical question to myself. Let’s say that someone invented a machine that would record your dreams so that you could watch them over again on the internet. No more struggling over just what you saw; every instance would be recorded in a convenient digital format. However, not only would your dreams be recorded but they would be stored in what could only be described as DreamTube. The entire world could also see exactly what you saw as you slept. If this was the case would you sign up for the machine?
I think for the most part the answer would be no. Now it is true that I would give pretty much anything to reexamine my dreams (partly due to the fact that I get inspired by them and partly for the insight into my subconscious) but I don’t think I would want to open that up to outsiders. This is coming from someone who posts almost every detail about his life to a website every night. Plus, would you want to share every dream you have in which you are naked in a classroom? Would anyone have the courage to say “Here is what my dreams are like world. What do you think?” It’s an interesting thought experiment to say the least.
Anyway, I want to spend a little more time delving into the nature of political candidates. (Yes, I read the comment on last night’s post. It says something about America that I can no longer tell if that was an entirely sincere comment or if it was written in a post-ironic sense.) What I want to discuss are some of the things that a presidential candidate can not be.
The first rule is that they cannot be fat. Yes, Bill Clinton was overweight but I’m talking fat in the William Howard Taft sense of the term. The “could possibly get stuck in his own bathtub” criteria is one that voters could not overlook. It is strange given the obesity levels in the country but could you imagine a 300 pound presidential nominee. Just wouldn’t happen. Try to name a politician who meets that criteria and you would have to struggle. Given that politics is now a visual medium you have to present an image that works in that medium.
Another interesting area is the candidate’s religion. Now as opposed to even the recent past I don’t believe the actual religion of the candidate himself plays a great role. There was minimal issues about John Kerry being catholic (with most of it surrounding his pro-choice stance) and a little more about Joe Lieberman being Jewish but neither of those were major factors. Really, the only religious stance that I feel would be unelectable would be avowed atheists. It is interesting that in a country founded on religious freedom that this would be a major hangup. I just do not see the American population getting behind such a candidate, even though they would have no problem supporting a candidate who only pays lip service to religion. It isn’t a question of morals or ethics as those are not tied to religion. It is just that since so much of the country’s nature is tied to references to god that to actively not believe would prove to be a major hurdle.
I’ll end with a few of the other basic rules of presidential campaigns. It is always a benefit to be tall as historically the taller candidate wins the election. Height just plays better in terms of gaining respect and it shows when you watch the debates. Pay attention to things like posture and camera angles and how Obama’s height advantage creates a positive image of him for no reason other than the fact that he is tall. Also, have a short and recognizable name. Recent elections have gone to the candidate with the simpler last name. No one is sure why but it is actually true. Finally, always release your bad news on a Friday afternoon. No one watches the news on Friday night so you can get away with things.
No comments:
Post a Comment