presidential elections

So, perhaps so much for what Columbia University professor says (see previous post on debate) that people have already made up their minds by debate time and are simply looking to see how their candidate does in the ring, much like a sporting event.  If polls are accurate, and we know they often can be up for interpretation, it would seem that that theory is somewhat incorrect. The interesting thing about the comments is that the issue really seems to be about truth and getting to the heart of the matter whether it be about issues or even how polls are conducted.  This is the major thru-line of our time, and one that politicos often miss - how very much value is now placed on this.  Here's an interesting thing though:  the University of Michigan showed that between when it came to surveying people, the most truthful responses came from text.  Why? Because there is a record of it.  A key element in our society now which is underestimated.  Think Pew might start to survey that way?  Who knows but wondering if Big Bird's opinion was also included in these polls?

Is there more talk about such things as the venue move and Clinton charisma than  President Obama's actual speech itself.  Seems to be the case from the many comments we researched and for which we provided this snapshot here in our BETA version.  This is much more about emotion and a new mindset having beome much, much stronger since 2008.  Social change is in a fast-forward motion so in order to really capture the viewer, it seems Obama is going to have to really focus on what he says and with how much sentiment it is delivered.  Will we see that alluring speech-maker from back in the day?  Never say never, but with the advent of people broadcasting so much more of their own sentiments and strength via digital media since 2008; the bar is simply higher.  Further, the issue for the SmartPower generation is hearing how opportunities will be formed for the new economy and new social structure, much of which is digital.  When members of a society are becoming more leaderful themselves, they want to see the same innovative thought reflected.  The concept of "job" is changing.  The meaning of "capital" is expanding.  Are our political leaders actually ahead or behind the curve, and could the sentiment regarding O's speech tonight actually provide that answer already?  Hmmmm......

Oooh - the negative comments are plentiful on this one.  This seems to be in response both to class but also perhaps the unspoken: gender.  Held to higher standards and greater scrutiny (think Palin, Clinton, more), women seem to often be used as weapons-of-sort intended to deflect like a superhero.  Will it work, though?  This fact could also be why Romney's speech is greatly anticipated, and no matter what the nay-saying comment-sphere says;  they'll probably watch it.  But are commenters simply reflecting subconscious effect of what many studies show that media bias frames women as outsiders in politics (as per sociological analysis on portrayingpolitics.net)?  If so, that scenario coupled with a clear class bias makes us hope Mrs. Romney doesn't read much of citizen thought.  Let's see how it all shakes out!