Last night was a night that I won’t forget too soon. First of all, I experienced the embarrassment of going to Costco and having to leave $150 worth of stuff at the register. It was one of those uber-long Costco trips too. You know, the type where you get all the detergent, soap, toothpaste, bread, and cheese that you will need until the next World Cup (2010 for all those not knowing). Just for the record, I am not broke. I simply forgot that you cannot use a credit card (debit is okay) to pay at Costco. A quick dash to Trader Joe’s easily remedied the situation.
When I got home to put away the groceries, I was a little pissed and in no mood to cook. I don’t know, there is something about going shopping twice for the same stuff that kills whatever culinary ambition you have at the moment.
I felt like a burger and the only joint I know in the new ‘hood is Rod’s Char Burger. Rod’s is your typical So. Cal grease spoon. You know the type: char-broiled burgers, sandwiches, salads, a little Mexican food, possibly a falafel / gyro, etc.
I got to the counter and ordered the Avocado-Bacon Cheeseburger combo to go (easy as ABC). Per my usual routine, I moved over to that little jar of chiles gueros and stuffed one of those little paper envelopes … classic.
There were two women eating at one of the tables, both Latina, possibly in their early forties. In the middle of their table was the front page of the L.A. Times, which they were both reading. Before you go on accusing me of stereotyping my peoples, listen up. I know they were Latina because the following conversation took place … in Spanish (translated for those with limited paisa proficiency):
Woman 1: "Look at Hillary and Obama, they are running pretty close."
Woman 2: "I am going to vote for Hillary. I don’t like Obama, he does not have a lot of experience."
At this point, I was going to jump in their conversation. My spidey-like prO-bama* tendencies were starting to get riled up. I don’t know why I didn’t give my two cents. Actually, I know why I didn’t, the lady talked too fast. Good thing too! The conversation continued:
Woman 2: "I like Hillary, but if she does not win for the Democrats, then I think I am going to vote for Romney."
When I heard that, I thought, “That is the most inconsistent statement ever. It would be like me coming to Rod’s to satisfy my raw oyster and sashimi craving. Not really going to work.” The statement was not a joke. No crack about how he would get the vote because he is more handsome than the other candidates. Nothing. Just as I started to mull the statement in my head, a group of rowdy teens walked in and interrupted my thoughts. My number was called and I was out the door.
The conversation between the two women really got me thinking about the state of American politics. Before I get into the heavy thinking, I want to steer clear of an elitist pitfall that tends to arise in these conversations. Highly-educated, politically-engaged, NPR listening citizens (yeah, that’s YOU and ME) tend to view the average American voter as nothing more than a lemming of a higher order. Joe Blow votes the way Fox News tells him, and Jane Doe blindly tows the same party line she has for years. No thought, just shrewd politicians promising dog biscuits to voters who are all too eager to roll over. Add the fact that these were working-class Latinas and you could assume all sorts of other stereotypes that would further sully your regard for the voting public.
I want to squash those thoughts right now. Our democracy, however flawed it may be, does not function without individuals like the women at the diner. As a matter of general principal, these intelligent and involved women get props for engaging in political discussion when they are arguably the most politically disenfranchised group in the U.S. (poor, woman, and of color). They definitely get more props from me than even some of my “educated” friends who do not vote.
Back to the main question: What is it about the American political system that would make a person choose between two candidates with seemingly contrasting positions? Logic would dictate that if Hillary did not win the Democratic nomination (*crosses fingers*), a Hillary supporter would vote for the candidate whose positions align most closely with Hillary.
Hillary and Mitt have a lot in common. They are both human, carbon-based life forms. I think they each have ten fingers and ten toes. Hillary and Mitt both breathe air (although there is this nasty rumor going around that Mitt actually breathes “Perriair” like the Mel Brooks character in Spaceballs).
I think you get the hint. Hillary and Mitt, as far as I can tell, are not really in agreement on any political issue. The closest they get is that Hillary is pro-choice and Mitt was pro-choice once upon a time. If you need any more evidence of the Hillary-Mitt schism, check this environmental voting guide put out by the League of Conservation Voters.
Again, if you first choice is Hillary, why would your second choice be Romney? Are Obama and Edwards really that bad? More importantly, how many Americans are making this kind of “issue-free” decision?
I really do give serious love to those two women at the diner and not just because they ate their weight in chili cheese fries. They are practicing democracy as every American should. However, are we really picking our presidents based on non-issue factors (race, gender, looks, age)? And if we are picking the prez based on these other factors, what factors should be given what weight? I leave these questions to my loyal readership (don’t look around, this means you).
*P.S. – You know you like that one … prO-bama. Get it? Huh? Don’t steal it.
No comments:
Post a Comment