Comment: Interesting question

(See in situ)


Interesting question

Though individuals are indeed individuals, with their own thoughts and feelings and history, the majority of America has been in the group mentality for so long, with several cultures based on skin color and geographical location, that it is difficult to separate the individual out of the group-think. Many people are this way (having an opinion on a matter not because they have thought it out themselves, but because the "group" they belong to feels that way), and if we acknowledge it, maybe we can find ways to tackle it effectively so individuals become more aware of their individuality.

I have a Black, African-American friend who fully supports Obama because she believes him to be a good guy, who also said that she really liked Ron Paul, too, because he seemed like a good guy. Romney scared her to death, and she saw him as evil, but Ron Paul was a very different story. Like most people, she doesn't study politics much, so I doubt she knew much of their policies, but I feel that if her choice was between Obama and Ron Paul, she would have learned more about politics to figure out who would have been the better president. (Actually, scratch that. The media would have painted Ron Paul as evil beyond imagining if he was the nominee -_- That, and my friend was going through hell during the entire election process, so deeply studying the policies would have rightly been very low on the priority list.) I do not believe she would have voted based on skin color, but on whether someone was a "good man" or not.

Interestingly enough, that is very similar to how my white mother voted. She saw Obama as evil, and Romney as a good man. The politics didn't matter nearly as much as whether the president was "good and virtuous" or not. In this way, my mother and my friend are very much alike. They just looked at different evidence.

"Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." -- Thomas Paine