The Politics of Shoes (Guest Post by Casey of Moosh in Indy)

With the primary in Indiana fast approaching, it seems the candidates are spending every waking moment trying to get their messages into Indiana homes.  Are they succeeding?  I don't know, but I do know that many mothers, myself included, want to hear more about the issues and less about political mudslinging. 

After Obama took the time to answer our questions, we realized that every mother probably has similar questions they would like the candidates to answer before casting their votes.  So we begged asked one of our favorite Indiana mothers to tell our readers how she views the presidential race and explain why she's still undecided.

Casey's post explains exactly why it is that politicians should listen to us and be receptive to political discussions outside of the main stream media and the typical online political players like Netroots and the Huffington Post.  And why the candidates should spend less time explaining what their opponents are doing wrong and more time explaining how they will lead our country.

So without further ado, I give you our latest honorary MOMocrat, Casey from Moosh in Indy.

************************

Remember when Keds shoes were all the rage? (Well, okay, let me put this into perspective. Remember when Keds were all the rage to sixth grade girls in 1993?) I begged my mom for a pair. BEGGED. She didn't realize I was the only girl in my class that didn't have a blue "Keds" tag at my heel, and that it was killing my social status. She took me to the shoe store that weekend and showed me two white sneakers, only she covered up the label on the inside with her thumb. She asked me to pick which one was my beloved pair of Keds.

I picked wrong.

I picked the generic shoe.

My mom still got me the Keds, and wouldn't you know it, that little blue rubber label on the back marking it as a Ked?

Fell off two weeks later.

What does prepubescent angst and early '90's shoe fashion have to do with presidential candidates? Not much, but I'll sure try to make a good segue.

I wish somebody would show me a fancy little spreadsheet showing where each candidate stood on an issue. Only it wouldn't be labeled "McCain" "Obama" and "Clinton". It would simply be Candidate A, B and C. I could go down the list circling who's position suited me the most and when I was all done I could go with whomever fit my desires in a presidential candidate the best.  I wouldn't even want to know the true identities until after I had voted.

Sound crazy?

Maybe it does. But I've never been one to be passionate about politics. I care, believe me I care. But all of the pomp and money and speeches and signs and commercials and arguments really get in the way of wanting to make a decision based solely on what  a candidate would like to accomplish in office. And let's face it. There's never been an election like this before.

Democrat vs. Republican (okay, so that one's not all that different.) Men vs. woman. Black vs. white. Younger vs. older. It's enough to make your head spin.

I have been doing my research. But just as with the Keds, the labels keep getting in the way.  Maybe Obama is the best candidate. He certainly is the "coolest" candidate to come along in a long time. But is that why he's so popular to some people? They're basing their vote off "cool"? (Not you beautiful MOMocrat readers of course. *ahem*) His campaign website is way "cooler" than Hillary's. His signs are "cooler" and all the "cool" celebrities are behind him. Personally I have a hard time getting past the whole kerfuffle with his Pastor and the fact that whenever I've heard him talk he comes across as arrogant. But that shouldn't matter, right?

And then there's Hillary. I personally would like to see what a woman and a mother could do for this country. Presidential candidate or not, women are amazing creatures. But I can't base my vote off the fact that she's a woman. It would be the Keds all over again.

And McCain. The proper stereotype of an American president. Rich white man with a pretty coiffed wife at his side.

Keds! Keds! Keds!

So is it possible to strip away all the personal feelings, the labels and the stereotypes?  Why do politics have to be so messy, expensive and ugly? I know families who are ripped apart every four years when the election comes along. Anybody out there neutral enough and really good at spreadsheets?

I would like to say to whomever wins come November, it is my duty as an American citizen to support you as president. Even if I don't agree with you all the time. Or even if I don't agree with you to begin with. Good luck. And better you than me, sucka.

*******
I am a middle class stay at home mom putting my husband through law school out here in the flat boring plains of Indiana. I don't know if I'm a democrat or a republican. I like to bake and believe that if we could all take care of each other despite gender, age, social status, race, religion or and sexuality, half of the nations problems would be solved by November. I write over at a little blog known as moosh in indy. My name is Casey, and I approved this message.

Comments

[Donna]

Thank you for posting here, Casey. I'd kind of like to see that spreadsheet, too! I would be curious to see if I still supported the candidate I voted for in our primary.

[Lauren]

I love the spreadsheet idea. We do really get wrapped up in our candidate's persona and image, I agree.

[Daisy]

My name is Daisy, I enjoy shoes and baking cookies, and I loved your post! Image is much too important for a presidential candidate. I keep trying to dig deeper, and I keep coming up with the same answer.
I hope I can vote for her in November. :)

[Krista]

Awesome post Casey! I totally agree with you. And did you know, there is actually a "candidate picker" out there somewhere. I think it's on the Minnesota Public Radio webpage here: http://minnesota.publicradio.org/projects/ongoing/select_a_candidate/poll.php?race_id=13 I found it very enlightening. It asks you where you stood on certain issues and how important they are to you and then ranks all the candidates according to how well they fit with you. It also gives you candidates specific ideas on those positions so you can read more than the one sentence idea.
I did it a long time ago so I don't know if they've narrowed the field at all, all I know is I wish John Edwards hadn't dropped out as I would have totally voted for him. Shocking, as I'm usually a republican! ;)

[moosh in indy.]

Krista-I just did the MPR poll and am surprised at the answer I got. SEE PEOPLE! This is the kind of stuff we need to be able to make proper decisions based on fact not appearance.

[Glennia]

I took the poll, too. Now I'm voting for Mike Gravel. How did that happen?

[jaelithe]

Casey, this post is wonderful. Thank you so much for being our guest. I think the candidates, and THE MEDIA, especially, need to hear your message.

[John J.]

Casey, I couldn't agree more with wanting to hold these people up side by side. I did something similar with the Democrats back before Feb 5 (although I didn't remove the "logos") and I intend to do something similar once we have full tickets.

There is something to be said for looking at the whole person outside of just their policy points as well. You also have to be able to assess how these people will work to get these policies passed and you have to look at their larger judgment and foresight qualities. Back in 2000, it would have been great to know that one candidate would start a war in an uninvolved nation after being attacked by terrorists. We don't know what the next four years (eight?) will give us. The current presidential talking points could become completely moot after some event two years down the line. It is their judgment (and personality) that will show us how they will handle the unexpected.

Will these candidates be able to inspire the country to work together to overcome these unforeseen difficulties awaiting us or will they be able to push the American people (and Congress) through these difficulties? These questions are also beyond the "logos", but they can't be summed up in policy points. You can only get insights into these by looking at how they have achieved their careers and how they have run their campaigns so far. Even then, you may not get a full picture of what the next four years will bring (*cough*I am a uniter*cough*).

[Darla]

I took the test above and I can't believe it actually aligned with my choice of candidates. Usually I come up with someone I have never heard of. LOL

[Good & Crazy]

I took the poll too, came up with Hillary. That was a surprise, I've been leaning towards Obama. He just seems like a Ked kind of guy.

[Jess]

Here in the great state of Indiana we are getting hit hard by those running for office. Radio, TV, personal appearances, and appearances by their representatives have been occurring this week in droves. I am so excited that we will have a huge impact on who will be running for president. I am also disappointed in some of the posts I have read on other blogs about people only voting democrat to try and cancel out another person's vote. I think that is shameful and a waste.

[Antonette]

I took that test and came up with Obama and Clinton tied as my first choice. So can I put them both in office or what?

[Shamelessly Sassy]

I'm in the same boat. I desperately need the nameless spreadsheet. Someone should jump on this, pronto.

[TX Poppet]

I was feeling incredibly depressed by all the political posts I've been reading lately. Then I read this and I have to say thank you! Thank you for letting me see this whole thing in a new and inspiring way! Big hugs from a middle class moderate no longer depressed white lady in Texas.

[Must be Motherhood]

Well said, Casey.

I'm one of those useless "I see each side of the coin" people, though, and while a candidate's stand on issues should be the basis of a voter's decision, I think there's a hellovalot to be said for personality and window-dressing. Personality, presentation, and social smoothness cannot be discounted as really important factors when you're talking about one of the most important figures in global politics. What they look like and how they sound does matter. Or, it doesn't *not* matter.

[Gunfighter]

This really isn't tough to do, Casey... Get a legal-sized piece of paper, and write down the issues that are most important to you.

Once you have your list, write down what YOU believe the solutions to those problems are (and if you have no clue, leave it blank)

Do the hard work of investigation each candidate's position on your issues. Remember to use the Congressional record to find out how they have or have not supported legislation that you feel strongly about.

Your choices will become fairly clear rather quickly. They will be based on fact and strong personal feelings. You'll know.

When I did all of this last year, I came up with Dennis Kucinich as my candidate of choice. He was THE ONLY candidate who said what I wanted to hear about the issue that is most important to me. Alas, he is no longer in the race. I had to pick the candidate who was next in line for me... and I am supporting that candidate vigorously.

It takes a little extra effort... but to tell the truth, this is too important to do it easily.

GF

[cynematic]

Great post, Casey. I enjoyed your spreadsheet idea. I try to block out a good amount of spectacle and speechifying and getting teary-eyed by watching very little tv campaign coverage. Radio, print/online sources do me fine!

[John J.]

Gunfighter, the research has already (largely) been done for you. Back at the end of January I did an eight post break down of the major issues and the candidates' action points (Dem only) first post is here - http://johnsmentaldetritus.blogspot.com/2008/01/in-depth-on-issues-part-1.html I didn't cover everything and, mostly, stuck to what I could find buried on their websites. This doesn't cover what has come out in the debates or other major issues since, but for the most part this is where they have been for more than three months.