Change

[cellardoor6]

As I'm sure you're aware, I'm referring to the recurring use of the term "change" in the presidential campaigning by the most notable candidates.

Well, I'm sick of that word, and all its variations.

"Change"

"Change, make change, change Washington, agent of change, changes, I'm a change agent, bring about change."

Yep, it's officially cliché now, that's for certain. The candidates jumped on the bandwagon after the idea of change and related rhetoric was shown to appeal to voters, and now even the Republicans are using the lingo... and getting applause for it.

It's become just plain ridiculous, it's like the candidates on both sides don't even have to specify WHAT it is they are going to change, and what will be a result of the supposed changes they will make. They just spew out the same tired words and phrases over and over again as the foundation of their speeches. Nobody has the moxie to clearly define what they are going to do that will differentiate them from the other candidates.

Notice how it is rarely asked of the candidates to give detailed descriptions of their policies? The candidates have been able to completely avoid describing WHAT THEY PLAN ON DOING in specific language. It's all pep talk and no substance. None of them has a plan, or at least not a plan they want to reveal this early on, which would force them to defend their plan.

Have any of you heard Barrack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee or John McCain (the front runners) go into any detail about what it is exactly they are going to do to overhaul our system and bring about the earth-shattering, awe-inspiring change they promise?

Also, what other possible word or expression could be used? Is there any? What can they start saying to change (cringe) their ridiculously repetitive speeches?

Yes, I've asked you to change the term "change" into something less played-out.

Go.

[LostPride]

While I agree with you, several candidates have released plans for health care reform. One point related to this is the edge incumbent candidates have over the political standbys: Many people see Hillary Clinton and John McCain as the status quo, the people to beat, a tremendous advantage for Obama and Huckabee. As empty as their slogans are, they are believable, as they have not yet settled into established political figures and can bring, well... change.

[Madferit]

I'm not sure about the other candidates but that's all I've heard Obama say. He just keeps yelling change.

[JudgeDredd]

Brilliant. It's change now, or status quo = Repulican (John McVain)

[Imperator]

Yes, I've asked you to change the term "change" into something less played-out.

Revolution?

[Musician]

Change is the new 9/11

[SadisticMonkey]

I always seem to run out of clean clothes whilst watching political speeches.

[therealsylvos]

Bah its all because of this soundbite culture we have. When a canditate is asked to answer a question and defend it in 30 seconds, as if we can really get to know his position and his defense of it in 30 seconds, its disgusting.
I wish we could have debates more like the Lincoln and Douglas debates of 1858, where we get more than soundbites and one word slogans, but where actual ideas are pitted against each other.

[JudgeDredd]

At 1/9/08 01:21 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote: I always seem to run out of clean clothes whilst watching political speeches.

So watch them naked.. They're there making them imagining everyone's naked anyhow.

[tony4moroney]

ch-ch-ch-changes

[cellardoor6]

At 1/9/08 05:06 AM, tony4moroney wrote: ch-ch-ch-changes

Indeed, you would have made a clearer reference if you linked to the song.

Bowie ftw

[Harry-Feltersnach]

At 1/9/08 12:22 AM, Imperator wrote:

Yes, I've asked you to change the term "change" into something less played-out.

Revolution?

revolutions are bloody conflicts

the change they speak of is legislative

[SmilezRoyale]

At 1/9/08 01:28 AM, therealsylvos wrote:

I wish we could have debates more like the Lincoln and Douglas debates of 1858, where we get more than soundbites and one word slogans, but where actual ideas are pitted against each other.

You mean before suffrage became inflated in value?

[Christopherr]

Sometimes I wish a politician would run around campaigning for "Constancy!"

[SmilezRoyale]

At 1/9/08 05:06 PM, Christopherr wrote: Sometimes I wish a politician would run around campaigning for "Constancy!"

They do at times, especially when changes brought by a politician are causing problems; the opposing party can opt for a change towards older more beneficial forms of fiscal policy and the people; wanting to make any change which benefits them; would agree.

It's not usually a constant struggle between losing conservatives [Not Fiscal; just 'stay the course' types in general] and increasing progressivism. But we are in the part of the cycle where change is wanted because people, concerned or dis concerned with victory in iraq, want a change in the tactics. But change means nothing when applied to policy. A current law can be enforced to increase the benefit of the people, yet this is change. While the law can be changed entirely and chaos would ensue from it, and this is also change.

[Empanado]

At 1/9/08 12:29 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Bowie

You are as of now less lame than you used to be.

Yes, I've asked you to change the term "change" into something less played-out.
Go.

Kind of like "[candidate] is for Things Being Not Quite As They Are Now Anymore"?

[Shaggytheclown17]

Dennis Kucinich is the candidate of change, he is the only candidate actually trying to do something about what is going on even though he is being completely ignored by the media.

He was the one who proposed the resolution to impeach Dick Cheny for obvious crimes against the constitution and many other things.
He was the original person whom all the other democrats are steeling words from since he has been excluded form the last two debates, you can see how they all talk about change but he is the only one who actually does something.

If you want change, you would be smart to support Dennis Kucinich.
I even heard an actor from lord of the rings, Viggo Mortensen is endorsing him and is very outraged at the media for excluding him, if you want the links to the videos then jus ask me, or click the link below this message to go to Dennis's youtube page n see his videos.

Peace out everyone.

[cellardoor6]

Shaggy, shut the hell up.

You're either wacked out of your mind, or the most dedicated alt I've ever seen.

[Christopherr]

At 1/9/08 05:35 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote:

At 1/9/08 05:06 PM, Christopherr wrote: Sometimes I wish a politician would run around campaigning for "Constancy!"

They do at times, especially when changes brought by a politician are causing problems; the opposing party can opt for a change towards older more beneficial forms of fiscal policy and the people; wanting to make any change which benefits them; would agree.

It's becoming rarer and rarer to see old-fashioned small-government conservatives, who don't want all these government changes. Now we have conservatives that are so conservative they want to do what the liberals want to do (one being Huckabee, with his isolationist schtick. He keeps giving me this notion that he wants out of Iraq.). Not much good could come from the government growing at the rate it is.

It's not usually a constant struggle between losing conservatives [Not Fiscal; just 'stay the course' types in general] and increasing progressivism. But we are in the part of the cycle where change is wanted because people, concerned or dis concerned with victory in iraq, want a change in the tactics. But change means nothing when applied to policy. A current law can be enforced to increase the benefit of the people, yet this is change. While the law can be changed entirely and chaos would ensue from it, and this is also change.

Not many laws really help the people nowadays. A couple examples:
-this lighting bull we have to deal with in 6 or 7 years; and
-social security.

Catch my drift?

[SadisticMonkey]

At 1/9/08 06:18 PM, Shaggytheclown17 wrote: Dennis Kucinich is the candidate of change, he is the only candidate actually trying to do something about what is going on even though he is being completely ignored by the media.

If you're going to mindlessly promote Kucinich, at least do it with an unknown alt or something.
I'm willing to bet that because it is you promoting him, people on the BBS are actually less likely to vote for him.

[cellardoor6]

At 1/9/08 05:50 PM, Empanado wrote:

At 1/9/08 12:29 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Bowie

You are as of now less lame than you used to be.

I was always less lame then you thought I used to be.

I have every single Bowie CD. I saw Bowie live in 2004 at the Paramount Theater in Seattle after "Reality" came out . I was like 30 ft from him.

That's how awesome I am.