Which do we prefer? Elitists or regular folks? Based on the media, we're very confused.

America - the land of freedom and opportunity, where any man or woman can rise from poor and difficult upbringings to achieve great things. We all love this idea that our nation was founded on, the idea that we are all equal, and that our government should be run by those who accurately represent us, not those who would treat us as subjects.

All this being said, it's odd that we can't make up our mind regarding the Presidency - do we want someone like us, or someone better?

This election cycle has been extremely interesting, as the term "elitist" is being thrown around with the same hatred we usually reserve for those who commit atrocities or crimes against humanity. It also appears that being labeled with this description can come with statements that could possibly be interpreted as suggesting elitism (such as using the word "bitter"), and not with outright statements that some people are better than others. Of course, when you do consider our history and feelings about our nation, it would be easy to understand why we do not want someone who thinks they might be royalty, or inherently better than the people he or she is supposed to be representing, in the highest position in the land.

So, how come when our candidates do act like regular people, we punish them for it?

Hillary goes into a bar and drinks a beer and does a shot (granted, it was of the most elitist alcohol out there - found that one funny Jon Stewart, thanks), and instead of praising her for showing she has a real side, we condemn the behavior. Obviously we don't want a drunk in office, but who doesn't have a drink every once in a while? Most regular people can relax with a shot, so why can't the candidates, who we don't want to be elitist?

Barack Obama gets irritated with some bozo who is in his face demanding that the Senator takes a picture with him, and we take him to task for getting frustrated. How would you, or any other "regular" person out there, react? Of course we need someone in office who can handle difficult situations with grace, but there should be a limit to what they need to put up with. Any regular person would have punched this guy in about half the time Obama dealt with him. Instead, Obama is criticized for getting slightly upset.

Our president, and other elected officials for that matter, should be expected to act with a certain manner in public. They have a responsibility to do so, as they are representing our nation and must act in our best interests. However, we need to make a choice. Do we admit that these politicians, with their expensive and prestigious educations, vast experience running campaigns, and ability to create legislation and work with other politicians to support their constituents, might indeed have more skill, intelligence, or other better qualities than we do? In that case, we can indeed hold them to a higher standard of behavior, in return for admitting they might be the elite. Or, do we understand that these people have their bad days like we do, that they might stumble in speeches, get facts wrong occasionally, and perhaps make incorrect decisions even with good intentions? In this case, we can't expect them to act in ways we wouldn't be able to ourselves.

I'm well aware that the best case scenario is a middle ground between the two discussed options. I'm also aware that in this era of cable news networks, blogs, and constant coverage and video recordings, that each candidate's actions and words will be over analyzed. However, we need to think back to our nation's founding, and understand that none of our politicians have been given Divine Right to rule, and that they are not royalty. Just as we would never allow ourselves to be treated as subjects, neither should our candidates be expected to be infallible rulers who are better than we are.

Our options are, in truth, not limited to "elite" or "regular", so why should we try to force candidates into certain labels? We should spend our time trying to understand candidate's positions, not labeling them with inaccurate descriptions. Until we understand what we have to work with, our government will never improve. As we saw in tonight's debate, getting sidetracked with non-issues is a problem we need to end.

PS - If you liked the topic of the above post, there's a post on Communicative Action about a similar thought. Check it out when you get a moment.

Speak to you soon!