| abstract
| - by user PhatShady I want to take a moment and explain my Alpha Wolf Theory of American Politics. America is a fierce nation filled with passionate warriors who will fight outsiders and each other for their beliefs. I feel that we are the most passionate and intelligent people on the face of the earth. We are the best. So the leader of the best needs to be the best of the best. He needs to be the embodiment of what we like about ourselves. This embodiment needs to appeal to several passionate segments of the pack. If he can demonstrate that leadership then he is leader, if he shows weakness or frailty a significant portion of the pack will turn away or tear him to pieces. The definition of pack in this theory are those who vote or influence those who vote. The pack is not usually made up of conbeciles, christo fascists, libtards, or moonbats. These people typically vote along party lines and rarely deviate from their respective norms. However, these factions behave “pack like” within their own arena. The pack is made up of those who are responsible for such gems a “convention bounce” or an increase in the polls for a candidate after a debate. These are the people who decide elections. Many may be swayed by making an ‘informed’ choice. I would beg to differ, it is my belief that a great majority of the pack are swayed by subtle nuances of appearance and character of the candidates for leader of the pack. Let me show you some examples. In the first election cycle that I was eligible to vote in Gary Hart lost his nomination bid due to the fact that he had changed his father’s name that had been given to him, later he was found to be ‘catting’ around with a woman who was not his wife. A man who will change the name given to him by his father cannot be trusted to run he pack. He lost the primary. Later Dukakis had a picture taken of him in a tank and looked like an opportunistic clown. The court jester cannot be seen as a serious leader. The cycle of ’92 brought out many disturbing images of the contenders and it truly was a “hold your nose and vote” for those who choose the pack’s leaders. President Bush was seen as not being honest with the pack or wishy-washy about his stance on taxes. Bill Clinton had questions of his fidelity and eventual loyalty to the packs ideals. Ross Perot was an early favorite and generated enough excitement within the pack to have his name placed on the ballot in all 50 states. But Perot showed weakness when he bowed out and then later when he returned with conflicting statements for his earlier indecision and personal background he was seen as weak, not worthy of leadership. During the 1996 campaign Senator Robert Dole looked like the noble statesman, a man of experience to lead the pack. However, he took a nosedive off of a stage. This was played again and again. The pack saw that he had stumbled, he was weak. The other two contenders were able to draw enough support away from Dole in spite of their own foibles to doom his candidacy. The 2000 election is where this theory comes into its own. It was Al Gore’s fault pure and simple and here is why. Al Gore looked weak on election night. It wasn’t Ralph Nadar’s fault, the fact that he didn’t carry his own state, or that he had chosen a Jewish running mate. On that evening he had called George W. Bush to concede. He had shown his throat, if you will; he had rolled over and offered surrender to his rival for leadership of the pack. Within the pack you cannot take this back. You can try another day but you will never enjoy the full support of the pack. This single event, this moment of capitulation was enough to sway the pack’s opinion and allow those who decide to anoint their leader without tearing the pack apart. In 2004 the choice became more simple as the election went on and the ‘Beer and a BBQ quotient’ of the Alpha Wolf Theory came into play. John Kerry was seen windsurfing in spandex and berating a fellow snowboarder. His running mate, John Edwards, was seen grooming himself for an appearance. These are not the qualities of a leader. President Bush was able to market his ability as the guy you’d want to have beer and a bbq with. Kerry looked like an effete snob who would tell you things about wines that you could never hope to understand. Kerry appeared to try to please everyone all the time. President Bush had a simple clear message and this was enough to swing the pack back toward him for in time for reelection. Howard Dean also suffered from the Alpha Wolf principle during the primaries. His scream made him look emotionally unstable and it was played over and over again. His pathetic attempts at damage control made him look weak and he began to lose momentum. There are those who attribute election fraud or other nonsense to a candidate losing. Fraud is present in every election. But if you look around your own tribal area, if you look at your own office politics, who is the leader, who is the real power, I bet it is the person who shows the least amount of fear and a greater self-confidence than other members of the pack. As we enter full swing into the 2008 election cycle I will be making updates to this theory and demonstrate how each candidate is or is not the Alpha Wolf of American Politics. So far I can tell you at least two candidates have no chance. John Edwards, again guilty of being a pretty boy with a $400 haircut. The other is Tommy Thompson. He did the backstroke about his remark on gays and this has made him look weak to the conservative pack. __NOEDITSECTION__ From The Opinion Wiki, a Wikia wiki. From The Opinion Wiki, a Wikia wiki.
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)