Sanders delegate says: 'If Hillary doesn't win, that's Hillary's fault'. Is the voting populace too insensitive against our candidates?

  • Voters should be more sensitive when it comes to the candidates

    Voters are much too cavalier in our opinions of political candidates. It seems that voters just believe that everything should be handed to them on a silver platter instead of actually considering candidates' backgrounds and beliefs on key issues. The public appears to take for granted the democratic process which leads to a more cynical viewpoint.

  • Yes, the voting populace is too insensitive against candidates.

    Yes, voters are very insensitive toward our candidates' ability to control how people vote. For example, political decisions are influenced by many factors that do not directly involve the candidate's position on issues. A republican is not likely to vote for Hillary due to his or her loyalty toward the republican party. Therefore, Hillary's existence has nothing to do with the voting decision.

  • Yes, they are.

    Whether or not a single person wins a political race is not solely decendant on them. We have come to expect the wrong things, and possibly too much from our political candidates. The divide between Bernie and Hillary and the great 3 ring circus that this latest election has become is proof of that.

  • No, the voting populace is not insensitive towards our candidates.

    No, the voting people aren't being insensitive to candidates. They are running for United States President, which means they'll be leading our nation and representing all of us to the world. They have an obligation to prove themselves to the voters. The voters do not have an obligation to them.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.