Taxes and Candidates?

[GeekyPenguin]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

It was primarily a joke in this thread, but . . .

I think sometimes people are willing to assume that the people who support the other person are idiots.

And, yeah, I'm sometimes afraid that it runs backwards too and that a perception that idiots support a candidate affects the perception of the candidate.

I'm not sure how much the average voter really considers issues as opposed to voting on self-perception and perception of candidates. If this weren't the case, why do we get crappy news stories about the music candidates listen to? There's an attempt to show superficially what kind of person the candidate is, and apparently we're supposed to care.

Not that the average voter is incapable of weighing issues, but just that sometimes people don't bother.

ETA: I realize there's a distinction between elements that a candidate chooses for himself or herself and the idiots who latch on, but I'm not sure that candidates aren't kind of held responsible for their supporters, even when the supporters aren't serving in an officially endorsed view.

EATA: If you were "branding" a candidate, would you want Earp in the picture? Just saying.

I like to think of Tom Earp is the Ann Coulter for bitter older men. Just a lot of babble in the background from someone who doesn't even know what they are saying.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by GeekyPenguin

I like to think of Tom Earp is the Ann Coulter for bitter older men. Just a lot of babble in the background from someone who doesn't even know what they are saying.

Well played.

[nittanyalum]

Originally Posted by GeekyPenguin

I like to think of Tom Earp is the Ann Coulter for bitter older men. Just a lot of babble in the background from someone who doesn't even know what they are saying.

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Well played.

Yes, but now I picture Earp in an inappropriately slinky dress and bad makeup. Thanks for the visual.