Shades of Gray

One of the biggest rationalizations/copouts in politics today is one used by far too many voters, usually when someone makes an observation about one politician’s unethical or potentially illegal behavior or the politician’s blatant falsehoods. Those who want to support the politician, despite that behavior or those lies, all too often say, “All politicians are crooks” or “They all lie.”

To begin with, every single human being who reaches adulthood has lied. That’s not the question. The question is what kind of lies they told and to whom. Were they white lies to spare someone’s feelings? Or lies to excuse their own failures, like claiming they were late to work because an accident backed up traffic when they really overslept because they were hung over. Or were they lies like those told by former President Trump? The other question is how often and how blatant the lies.

When we deal with acquaintances, most people weigh the “shades of gray” in judging people, but when they deal with politicians, from what I’ve seen, the smallest fault in a politician one doesn’t like or who’s of the “wrong” party is enough to justify voting for a politician with far greater faults who comes from the “right” party. People shy away from dealing with shady merchants or car dealers, but they don’t show the same reluctance when a shady politician from their own party spouts blatant falsehoods.

And usually, neither candidate is perfectly pure. When that happens, a large segment of each party tends to justify staying with the party candidate by magnifying the sins of the opposition candidate, rather than by comparing their actions and statements of the two [now, most people say they do this, but it’s clear from election results that many don’t].

Sometimes, voters believe that the principles a politician opposes or supports justify voting for that politician, despite his or her flaws, but how large do the flaws have to be before voters turn away from a flawed politician? How outrageous do the falsehoods and lies have to get before voters reject a politician from their own party?

Some voters never do, and that was how the Germans ended up with Hitler, the Italians with Mussolini, the Russians with Putin, and why Trump believes he can run and win a second term.

3 thoughts on “Shades of Gray”

  1. Wine Guy says:

    This is also why we have districts where people say “My representative/senator/mayor/sheriff is great! Those other people need to get voted out…” Because most folk would rather have the devil they know.

    If a politician really wants to get me to listen, all they really have to do is say something along the lines of “Well, there’s no simple answer because there are nuances to the situation that have to be taken into account. Let me explain…” 10 second sound bites, tweets, etc. make for crappy communication and worse understanding. But no talking head can go for more than 10 seconds without interrupting, interjecting, or just being rude. Since no detailed explanations seem to occur and the word ‘nuance’ seems to be a perjorative these days, I am left with little by which to judge.

  2. Wine Guy says:

    And I wish that ‘discrimination’ hadn’t become such a tainted word, but I’ll leave the explanation of that to T. Eliot Stearns:

    http://www.archivesofrecluce.com/excerpts/ab_historical.html

  3. Bill says:

    Most people aren’t rational most of the time especially when it comes to voting. They tend to vote for the person they identify with or has the same ‘crazy’ they do.
    There are also the anarchists who vote for people because they want to see the damage they will do. Have you noticed how TV shows have dropped audience voting for the most part or greatly reduced its power. When it doesn’t matter enough people will vote for crazy because it is entertaining.
    In some cases, people are right in that the two candidates are about the same. 20 years ago, most republicans were not much different on an individual basis than the democrat they were running against. Rural Iowa is not going to have a liberal democrat running. There are always exceptions.
    That has changed recently in that the choice is evil or not evil. I am not surprised at the numbers because 25% of the population can’t tell the difference. Some are also evil and others haven’t realized that they are choosing short term gain at the expense of long term survival.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *