Okay I don't know if anyone else has noticed and/or thought of this, but I thought there was something rather peculiar - and, in my opinion, absolutely hilarious - that I observed during this quick 2-day mock campaign.
Hopefully I am not over- or under-representing any of the parties here (and by no means do I mean any offense that might be taken), but it appears to me at least that, even though we seemingly chose three random people in the class at random, the candidates have analagously defaulted into almost exactly the same party system we have today.
There is the liberal Jared Good, who responds plentifully and immediately, makes ludicrously high-minded promises of salvation and getting everyone an A, and even took credit for eliminating something that was never there in the first place (I'm not saying this is solely indicative of liberals, but there is something to be said about how closely it mirrors actual politicians). Overall message: 'I'm one of you.'
Then there is the conservative Nathan "Philosopher King" Holman, whose rational-minded tactics are based primarily on criticizing his opponent (again, not a sole attribute of conservatives, but notable nonetheless) and dealing with facts. Overall message: 'Let's take care of business.'
And then there is the third-party Gloria Larson, who...I'm sorry I really don't mean to sound so derogatory, but so far I have only seen one thing from her regarding the election campaign and it was a very sweet and personalizing message that didn't take a position on anything one way or the other (presumably she will do so in class) and felt very much to me like the kind of campaigns run by the various third-party candidates, who are so overshadowed by the other candidates that they are hardly even noticeable. Overall message: 'May the best candidate win.'
Now I could be wrong here (I was very tired on Tuesday so I may have missed something), but I don't ever recall any general rules on the parties and positions of this in-class election. So I find it extremely interesting that, beginning from random, the three candidates so quickly defaulted into the roles of the "three" parties we have today. Surprised the crap out of me - I mean I could see that type of thing occurring over time like weeks or months, but I never would have guessed that it could do so to this degree in a matter of days.
The main thing that surprised me so much about the election (as I'm sure did everyone else) was the outcome after voting in the differing three methods. The outcome came as a great shock to me, I was completely unaware before this class that voting could be done in such a manner. It caused some concern to me about voting for greater issues and leaders but also made me wonder if employing a voting method other than simple popular vote may be more beneficial in the long run in some ways. It is difficult to discern the "right" way to do it. I also thought it was interesting how each candidate approached each campaign in completely different manners and played various roles in the election. This could potentially be turned into a sociological examination of fulfilling ones role in a situation or community.
ReplyDelete