Political Intuition

[Selena_Kitt]

I'm going to scare the $&*@$#@!% out of the rational thinkers around here with this, but... *deep breath* here goes anyway...

I do almost everything intuitively... and that includes voting. I don't discount rational argument, and I do pay attention to the issues and what's important to me, but I have a tendency to follow my intuition, even if it goes against the above...

Since the minute Obama came onto the scene, I've had this funny feeling about him. I feel wary... I don't trust him. There feels like there's something going on under there that we're not seeing. I get a "Don't look at the man behind the curtain" sort of feeling... best I can describe...

I've been talking to people lately about politics... and the democratic choice keeps coming up, of course... and I've recently run into a few other intuitives who have had the same sort of "bad feeling" about him. Which perked up my antennae...

So I thought I'd put it out there... anyone else have this feeling? (I know Imp said she felt the opposite... so I'm not discounting that side of intuition either, of course ) I just want to know if there are others out there who have this "Yeah it all sounds good, but I can't quite put my finger on why it's really not..." feeling they're carrying around about this guy?

Or is it just me?

 

[Carnevil9]

You're crazy.

There are plenty of reasons to vote against this pinhead, but some vague "feelings" are not among them. How about: he wants to take my money away from me and give it to lazy slugs who won't work? How about, he wants to remake our health care system in the image of the post office? How about, he wants to pull out of Iraq immediately, making it Viet Nam Part Duex, and letting terrorists all over the world knew that we are fair game?

He may give you the creeping crawling heebee jeebies, but that is WAY DOWN on the list of scary things about this dude........Carney

 

[starrkers]

From the outside looking in, he's the least scary or creepy of the lot of them.

 

[DeeZire]

I get that creepy feeling about Hillary, especially after she got caught in her little lie about dodging sniper fire in Bosnia. Actually, the first thing that turned me off to Hillary was when she was in one of the earlier debates, and she wouldn't answer the question about giving illegals drivers licenses in the state of New York. Dodging questions is the trademark of the a politician, but it's not something I admire.

I see Obama as the best choice to show the world that the USA is not made up entirely of NASCAR rednecks who want to bomb any country that doesn't think or act the way we think they should. I also think he could do quite well with diplomacy, which is the best defense against terrorism we have. Now that Bush has turned the whole world against us, terrorism will be a constant problem for us, regardless of what happens in Iraq. For every terrorist we kill, ten more are inspired to enlist. I mean, I suppose we could just declare war on the whole world, as I'm sure many on this board would like to do, but that's not a solution.

I see Obama as having the most reasonable solutions for a society we could all be proud of. I'm not proud of kids going hungry, or dysfunctional schools, or drug laws that only foster crime, or people losing their healthcare because the get sick and their HMO kicks them off their plan, or uses the 'pre-existing condition' exemption to deny coverage. Who would be proud of that? I'm not proud of the billions of dollars wasted on corruption in Iraq, especially when that money could have been used here at home to feed hungry children.

There's so much about how this country is being run that literally turns my stomach, I see Obama as our only hope at regaining some shred of integrity.

 

[Carnevil9]

I see Obama as the best choice to show the world that the USA is not made up entirely of NASCAR rednecks who want to bomb any country that doesn't think or act the way we think they should.

This is my problem with Obama supporters. "Showing the world" is not a priority for me. Running our business the way we need it run is all that matters. The rest of the world hates us anyway; they can go to hell. We've got to take care of ourselves first......I'm Carnevil9, and I approved this message.

 

[starrkers]

This is my problem with Obama supporters. "Showing the world" is not a priority for me. Running our business the way we need it run is all that matters. The rest of the world hates us anyway; they can go to hell. We've got to take care of ourselves first......I'm Carnevil9, and I approved this message.

Maybe if you had someone in charge that was more interested in running your business than in running your business all over the rest of the world, the rest of the world wouldn't hate you so much.
Strangely, that's why I hope Obama gets up - I think he's more interested in the US at home than he is in the US anywhere else.

 

[DeeZire]

...The rest of the world hates us anyway; they can go to hell. We've got to take care of ourselves first...

Wouldn't you think that goading the whole world into hating us would make it harder for us to take care of ourselves? The US does not have exclusive rights to this planet. We have to share the planet with the rest of the world, which means we have to get along.

I suppose 'getting along' is relative. Some of us grow up and learn to deal with adversity like adults, some of us remain children till the day we die, settling our disagreements with fists instead of reason. Granted, you can't reason with terrorists, but if the USA was a better citizen of the world, terrorists would have no base, because the world wouldn't allow them to exist. Thanks to Bush and Cheney, the cat's out of the bag, and it's going to take years of diplomacy for the USA to regain it's status as a nation of reason and goodwill, if that's even possible.

 

[neonlyte]

I'm going to scare the $&*@$#@!% out of the rational thinkers around here with this, but... *deep breath* here goes anyway...

I do almost everything intuitively... and that includes voting. I don't discount rational argument, and I do pay attention to the issues and what's important to me, but I have a tendency to follow my intuition, even if it goes against the above...

Since the minute Obama came onto the scene, I've had this funny feeling about him. I feel wary... I don't trust him. There feels like there's something going on under there that we're not seeing. I get a "Don't look at the man behind the curtain" sort of feeling... best I can describe...

I've been talking to people lately about politics... and the democratic choice keeps coming up, of course... and I've recently run into a few other intuitives who have had the same sort of "bad feeling" about him. Which perked up my antennae...

So I thought I'd put it out there... anyone else have this feeling? (I know Imp said she felt the opposite... so I'm not discounting that side of intuition either, of course ) I just want to know if there are others out there who have this "Yeah it all sounds good, but I can't quite put my finger on why it's really not..." feeling they're carrying around about this guy?

Or is it just me?

Given that your election, like ours in UK, is decided by a couple of percentage points of 'floating voters', intuition is likely to be a major factor in deciding the election.

I've not actually heard Obama speak, which I'm sure would give a steer in one direction or another. Intuitively, I fear for him rather than over him. I feel much the same about Clinton and whilst I would instinctively lean toward a democratic candidate, in any election, I have the gut feeling that the USA needs a republican obsessed with health and welfare over military. I don't think the democratic party can 'fix' health and welfare other than by tinkering at the edges.

American citizens are growing obsessed with their 'world image'. It's not healthy. It's a counterproductive misplaced pride. Lead by example, fixing the problems at home has to be the priority of any incumbent President, Bush seems to have forgotten the basics, and whilst business is the key to economic well-being, business continues despite fiscally responsible obstacles placed in its path.

A year on from my first visit to the USA, I remain struck by two things: the enormity of the country - which changed my opinion about SUV's and gas pricing policies; and, the number of people employed in mindless jobs.

On the latter, admittedly my observations were largely based on visits to public buildings, you have an army of people doing 'janitorial' jobs most of whom seemed bored out of their minds. I sensed people were in employment simply pick up a pay check and the medical insurance that went with the package. I also get that sense from this forum when US employment has been mentioned over the years I've been visiting... the medical package seems more important than the job. It's an unhealthy (sic) way to earn a crust and skews employment from being a productive outlet for endeavour to simply going through the motions.

The USA is a great nation. I made a big mistake in not going there decades earlier. I believe the nation faces huge difficulties (on global terms) and needs to lead by example. In my view that means creating a fair deal for the people at home... first. Vote for the candidate you think has a chance of taking the first step in that direction.

 

[alwayswantedto]

Intuition shouldn't be ignored

You're crazy.

There are plenty of reasons to vote against this pinhead, but some vague "feelings" are not among them.

Just a comment.

Vague feelings are based on unrecognized, or not quite resolved, perceptions. These perceptions are the basis of intuition and expertise, and are certainly a valid basis for decisions.

Military and emergency response team leaders are trained to rely on such intuitions.

 

[angelicminx]

I'm going to scare the $&*@$#@!% out of the rational thinkers around here with this, but... *deep breath* here goes anyway...

I do almost everything intuitively... and that includes voting. I don't discount rational argument, and I do pay attention to the issues and what's important to me, but I have a tendency to follow my intuition, even if it goes against the above...

Since the minute Obama came onto the scene, I've had this funny feeling about him. I feel wary... I don't trust him. There feels like there's something going on under there that we're not seeing. I get a "Don't look at the man behind the curtain" sort of feeling... best I can describe...

I've been talking to people lately about politics... and the democratic choice keeps coming up, of course... and I've recently run into a few other intuitives who have had the same sort of "bad feeling" about him. Which perked up my antennae...

So I thought I'd put it out there... anyone else have this feeling? (I know Imp said she felt the opposite... so I'm not discounting that side of intuition either, of course ) I just want to know if there are others out there who have this "Yeah it all sounds good, but I can't quite put my finger on why it's really not..." feeling they're carrying around about this guy?

Or is it just me?

My mother has this going on as well. As for me, I don't feel anything one way or the other at this time. I know very little about politics, or the candidates for that matter, but I'm sure it's not just you.

 

[oggbashan]

My political intuition says "Don't vote for a politician".

I see the problem, not just in the US Presidential contest but in mature democracies generally, that we elect people who have made a career out of politics. They are part of the system and detached from the real business of their country.

We still have a few maverick politicians in the UK but they will never lead their party in government nor be major players.

Our Hereditary and Life Peers used to be people who had other lives and proportionately more of them had served in the armed forces. They may not have had the political wiliness of the Members of Parliament but between them they brought more experience of real life. The Life Peers were often created because of outstanding achievements in disparate fields and could produce experts in a wide range. Now that the House of Lords is to be filled by political appointees we will have two houses full of politicians. That makes me uneasy.

Og

 

[Liar]

From the outside looking in, he's the least scary or creepy of the lot of them.

...and that's what so creepy about him.

People are so used to politicians being boisterous or arrogant or back-stabbing or loud or disingenous or openly creepy or just plain moronic, that when someone comes along that (at least at first and second glance) is none of that, people get creeped out by that.

I mean, politics aside, there must be something deeply wrong with him as a person - he's running for president.

 

[impressive]

I trust my intuition -- and I completely believe you should trust yours (even when it disagrees with mine).

Drives my "thinker" friend crazy when I base a decision on "because it feels right" -- but my intuition has never steered me wrong. When I stop to analyze, that's when I fuck up.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

I do almost everything intuitively... Since the minute Obama came onto the scene, I've had this funny feeling about him. I feel wary... I don't trust him.

I get that creepy feeling about Hillary, especially after she got caught in her little lie about dodging sniper fire in Bosnia. I see Obama as having the most reasonable solutions . . .

I trust my intuition -- and I completely believe you should trust yours (even when it disagrees with mine).

OK, everyone clear about what to do now?

To be fair, in when it comes to making judgements about human abilities and character based on scanty and often conflicting data, sometimes you have nothing better to go on than intuition. Plus there's what Always said here: "Vague feelings are based on unrecognized, or not quite resolved, perceptions. These perceptions are the basis of intuition and expertise, and are certainly a valid basis for decisions." I'll note that that's not a reason to stop thinking - it's one to think harder.

But since reason gets dissed around here a lot, this struck me as a nice example of why starting a few hundred years ago the West decided there's something useful in it after all. Here's what that thing is:

It provides a final arbiter.

Without that, how can you possibly determine whose "intuition" is correct? To repeat, with only ambiguous, incomplete and conflicting data available the tool is not necessarily applicable in situations like this; when data is clear most people have no argument with reason. I note that several of these quotes pay homage to reason by using it to make an argument in support of their intuition, BTW.

One more observation: Part of why reason gets dissed around here is because the definition has become very narrow in the modern world. For the ancients it included things like intuition and more; it was essentially all the ways in which human thinking differed from animals. That definition can be a bit too broad, but I do think we can benefit by broadening our own definition a bit.

Logic is one of the tools of reason. Here's an example of an ignorant person attempting to use logic, but falling short :

BEDEVERE:
Quiet! Quiet! Quiet! Quiet! There are ways of telling whether she is a witch.
CROWD:
Tell us! Tell us!...
BEDEVERE:
Tell me. What do you do with witches?
CROWD:
Burn! Burn them up! Burn!...
BEDEVERE:
And what do you burn apart from witches?
VILLAGER #1:
More witches!
VILLAGER #3:
Shh!
VILLAGER #2:
Wood!
BEDEVERE:
So, why do witches burn?
[pause]
VILLAGER #3:
B--... 'cause they're made of... wood?
BEDEVERE:
Good! Heh heh.
CROWD:
Oh, yeah. Oh.
BEDEVERE:
So, how do we tell whether she is made of wood?
Does wood sink in water?
VILLAGER #2:
No, it floats! It floats!
CROWD:
The pond! Throw her into the pond!
CROWD:
A witch! A witch! A witch!
WITCH:
It's a fair cop.
CROWD:
Burn her! Burn her! Burn her! Burn! Burn!...
BEDEVERE:
Who are you who are so wise in the ways of science?
ARTHUR:
I am Arthur, King of the Britons.

 

[jomar]

Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking by Malcolm Gladwell

 

[neonlyte]

I think that last line should read: "I am Arthur, King of the Brightones".

Oh Yea of little Faith that Resorteth to Parable and Fable upon which to Enshrine Thy Doctrine.






Everyone knows Witches sunk because their wellingtons filled with water

 

[Selena_Kitt]

well geeeez, I didn't say I was ready to burn the guy at the stake, Roxy!

I don't ignore reason... it just isn't what primarily steers my ship.

Thinking isn't the opposite of intuition, actually... sensate is. Thinking and feeling are opposite. There's a subtle difference. I'm highly intuitive, so my sensate function is quite reciprocally lower. If I were a major thinker, my feeling function (empathy, etc.) would be lower. Of course, all of those things can be balanced in a person... mine just aren't. (Most, really, aren't...)

But I do know my intuition is about something... it usually is. It could be something as innocuous as noticing a hen in a wolfhouse (to use Liar's analogy ) ... but my fear is that it's something much bigger than that.

While I'm still not sure if he's the lessor of three evils (and I can't even believe I've considered voting Republican if Obama gets the ticket, but I have... ) and I honestly don't know how in the world someone could f*** up more than our current Moron-in-Chief has...

Still, that prickly little feeling I get when I hear him speak makes me worry about discounting it and going with reason-alone...

 

[DesertPirate]

...and that's what so creepy about him.
I mean, politics aside, there must be something deeply wrong with him as a person - he's running for president.

I remember when the media tried to claim Reagan was senile and brought up the question of when to remove a President due to mental incapacity. It made me think of what the press does to all candidates (even Obama though it's late) and I decided that they all show a serious lack of sanity when they announce the run for the office!

Does that make Colin Powell the sane one?

 

[logophile]

I have had this about all the major dem candidates this time around. The only who didn't give me the willies was Kucinich, and he's not even a little bit viable. When primary season about to really start rolling, I decided I had to put that aside and pick a candidate because I believe this is going to be one of the most important elections of my lifetime. I went to the websites for Clinton, Obama and Edwards to do my preliminary research. I went to youtube and watched speeches and then news searched each of them. It took me several days, but I finally decided that of the four of them, I am most philosophically aligned with Obama. I forcibly shook off my "willies" and fell in line with the Obama camp.

Just my buck two-sixty-three.

 

[impressive]

... (and I can't even believe I've considered voting Republican if Obama gets the ticket, but I have... ) ...

I have done the same re Hillary. She's the one who makes my intuition cringe.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

It took me several days, but I finally decided that of the four of them, I am most philosophically aligned with Obama. I forcibly shook off my "willies" and fell in line with the Obama camp.

Ah-HA! See, this is what I'd have to do... and have been resisting. And I wondered just how many others had done just this.

I hope Liar's right, and we just aren't used to seeing an "honest" person in that position. I really do hope.

 

[impressive]

I hope Liar's right, and we just aren't used to seeing an "honest" person in that position. I really do hope.

I think what we're not used to seeing is an intuitive feeler in the position. That's RARE.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

95 percent of all politicians have a serious personality disorder, else they would not be in the biz. The figure rises to 100 percent at the upper levels, especially in serious prez aspirants. So the creepy feelings you get about one of then are not incorrect - they just need to be extended to all the rest.

Sound extreme? By definition, these men (and woman) are driven by an ambition so extreme that can only be described as pathological. Most of them plan their entire life course around this. They are quite literally unbalanced.

And what is the thing they are ambitious for? Something socially useful like inventing a better cancer drug or building a business that saves consumers money on goods? No.

It's ambition for power. No wonder they give both reason-oriented and feeling-oriented people the creeps.

 

[neonlyte]

95 percent of all politicians have a serious personality disorder, else they would not be in the biz. The figure rises to 100 percent at the upper levels, especially in serious prez aspirants. So the creepy feelings you get about one of then are not incorrect - they just need to be extended to all the rest.

Sound extreme? By definition, these men (and woman) are driven by an ambition so extreme that can only be described as pathological. Most of them plan their entire life course around this. They are quite literally unbalanced.

And what is the thing they are ambitious for? Something socially useful like inventing a better cancer drug or building a business that saves consumers money on goods? No.

It's ambition for power. No wonder they give both reason-oriented and feeling-oriented people the creeps.

98% of voters have serious personality disorders, else they wouldn't vote for those who put themselves up for election. That 98% don't have creepy feelings, they have doctrine. It's the 2% who decide most election, which is why we get the usual stream of bollocks from both camps. The Democrats are suffering from myopia, the kind that can't see beyond the next question the opponent slings. They ought to have been a 'shoe-in' but the longer this Obama/Clinton farce continues, the less Presidential both candidates appear.

Elections are won and lost by the lies candidates sell to swinging voters. McCain looks the winner right now, who'd have thought that?

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

98% of voters have serious personality disorders, else they wouldn't vote for those who put themselves up for election. That 98% don't have creepy feelings, they have doctrine. It's the 2% who decide most election, which is why we get the usual stream of bollocks from both camps. The Democrats are suffering from myopia, the kind that can't see beyond the next question the opponent slings. They ought to have been a 'shoe-in' but the longer this Obama/Clinton farce continues, the less Presidential both candidates appear.

Elections are won and lost by the lies candidates sell to swinging voters. McCain looks the winner right now, who'd have thought that?

Minor correction: 98 percent of voters have some personality disorder, ranging in a continuum from mild to serious. High-level pols are clumped on the far, far end of that continuum.