From: garrett@Ingres.COM (QUOTE OF THE YEAR)
Subject: Re: The media will choose the next president
Followup-To: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
Summary: Maybe, maybe not 
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Keywords: 
Organization: ASK Computer Systems, Ingres Product Division
Date: 31 Aug 92 22:50:12 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.183835.29002@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov>, mulac@daystrom.lerc.nasa.gov (Ri writes...
> 
>    The number one factor in determining who will be the next president of
>the United States is the impression the media gives us of the state of the
>country. 

This is true. But it is also in the best interest of the media to voice
the opinion of mainstream USA. If the media starts to tell the people 
what they don't believe then people will switch the channel to find
a media outlet that is more credible. 

 Certain economic factors are down, but all things considered most
>people in the US are living under the best possible conditions.

This is highly debatable. San Francisco alone has an estimated
8,000 homeless. And no one can deny that the number of homeless is
way up over the last 15 years.

>    Though ABC probably expected the responses to follow the current polls,
>75% said they would vote for Bush with the remaining 25% saying they would
>wait until November to make a decision. 

What poll was this? The only poll you could get these numbers is a 
poll of Republican delegates. And that poll means very little. 

  These people had been TOLD that the economic conditions were
>terrible throughout the country, but when asked to cite personal experience
>they did not know anyone who was unemployed.

Would you like to ask me? 2 of my 4 family members are unemployed.
(and yes, they are all over 21. Both unemployed members have electronic
degrees.)

>a blue collar, middle class suburb in the sixties and seventies.  Only
>about 15% of my graduating class took school seriously, with plans to go on
>to college.

Last winter a friend of mine graduated from Cal Poly with an EE and a
grade point average of 3.45. He still hasn't found a job. Neither has 
most of the people he graduated with.

  Over half my graduating class (which didn't deserve to
>graduate) came from blue collar union groomed families which had fathers
>getting high pay for low skill jobs.

My dad is a member of the IBEW. He needed 2 years of school and 
aprenticeship to do his job. Do you have any idea what you are talking
about?

  They went through school with their
>'D' averages thinking that the unions would always be there to provide big
>bucks jobs for illiterates.

Either your friends didn't know anything about unions, or you don't.
Which decade are you thinking of?

 Every time I here
>someone bitching because there is not enough student aid or loans available
>I recall all the people I met as an undergraduate whose primary purpose in
>going to college was to avoid going to work and keep the party from high
>school going. 

I'm going to assume that you haven't been to school in some time.
Becuase school, for middle-class people like me, is something you 
fit around work. (I've been trying to put myself through school for
5 years now.)

>    In regard to my original point, most people think that 5% unemployment
>is very good and the people who are left are those who are basically
>'unemployable'.  With national unemployment running at I believe 8%,

If you factor in people who have used up their unemployment benifits, and
people who are considered to have "given up" finding work, then 
unemployment is around 11%. (Labor dept. figures)

 I
>would like to know how the other 90+% would even notice this difference in
>their daily lives. 

A very large percentage of the "poor" are working poor.(a majority?, probably)

 The only way they 'notice' it is when it's rammed down
>their throats by the media in a gloom and doom fashion.

Or when they step over a homeless person. 

>    Bush has a LOT of faults, but Clinton's economic plan puts a big
>emphasis on giving jobs to people to rebuild our infrastructure (i.e.
>shoveling tar on roads).

What neighborhood do you live in where the roads are in good condition,
the schools roofs don't leak when it rains, and all the unemployed 
deserve to be unemployed? Can I move there?

  This will not produce workers with needed skills
>and will only increase the deficit.  Both parties claim to support 'family 
>values', but to me that's going to have to mean the current unskilled,
>uneducated generation sacrificing their lifestyle goals so that the next
>generation can get ahead.  Just my $.03 .
> 
> 
-Garrett    
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections