Its something that I don't think many people tend to think about. We like to think we are independent in our decisions and we came to those conclusions all by ourselves. Truth is, we are influenced by family friends, experiences, stereotypes and the like and voting is very obvious.
For those that are unaware, in the city of Chicago there is quite a paramount race for Mayor. The long time incumbent, Richard Daley is stepping down and its a mad grab for power within the city.
Within one particular demographic, there was this big to-do about "THE" candidate. As in the candidate the people all agree on. In this case it was within the Black community after a thinning process reduced the pool from more than 5 to one. However, there are those running that in theory are "splitting the vote". But what does that mean?
Do a particular group of people have to completely agree on one candidate? Why? We believe in naivety that all will agree? It assumes a homogeneous mentality that is far from truth within such a volatile subject as politics. Only thing more derisive and divisive is religion.
All in all, we can say one thing but when we are within the booth casting our votes, all of that flies out the window.
Group-think though prominent, usually gets eschewed for individuality in the end. We all look at potential candidates the way we look at jobs; what can you do for me, why should I choose you.
So as we go forth and make our decisions, find the candidate that moves YOU. Not your mother grandmother, pastor, etc. Because ultimately your choice is what will affect you.
N
No comments:
Post a Comment