MPTV carried an extended video documentary regarding the run for the U S House of Representatives by John Smith, 29 of Missouri. When the votes were counted he lost to a legacy candidate -- the son of a former office holder.
In Chicago, Mayor Daley ( son the late Mayor Daley) won another term with 72% of the vote -- with a spate of corruption scandals stalking him.
A question -- why do voters opt for the known quantity -- in both these cases a legacy? Are the winners bona fide leaders? I'm not taking a position whether they are or aren't. It seems we lean towared the known reather than unknown... the devil we know is better than the one we don't./ What does that say about our ability to make objective judments based on the facts -- or are we willing to be submissve rather than take risks?
Hmmmm- Any comments/


Recent Comments