I had to borrow the wording for the title of this piece from my good friend Gawfer.
I was curious about a certain candidate’s constant chant of “hope” and thought I would look it up to see if that might give me a clue as to what he was talking about, since the candidate in question (*coughobamacough*) is kinda light on the details about the “hope” he has.
So, let’s go to Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary (I’ve always liked it, although since the revisionists have gotten hold of it there seems to be some changes that don’t jive with me):
1. A desire of some good, accompanied with an expectation of obtaining it, or a belief that it is obtainable; an expectation of something which is thought to be desirable; confidence; pleasing expectancy.
2. One who, or that which, gives hope, furnishes ground of expectation, or promises desired good.
3. That which is hoped for; an object of hope.
So, “hope” is a wish or desire for something, accompanied by expectation of its fulfillment.
Therein lies the problem.
This campaign is not about race, no matter how much the supporters of a particular candidate want to make it so. This campaign is not about age, no matter how much the supporters of the same candidate want to make it so. It’s not even about experience, no matter how much the supporters of either candidate do or do not want to make it so.
It is about perception. The perception of what is expected. With the RepubliCAN’Ts offering, the voters know that they cannot “hope” to see anything different, so the voters will be getting what they see (and, in a way, deserve, since they allowed the MSM to guide their voting in the primaries – but that’s another topic). With the DemocRAT’s offering, their supporters are claiming that their candidate offers “hope” but cannot express what exactly is being “hope”d for.
The demographics of the supporters of the candidate with “hope” would indicate that since they have a shorter attention span, they don’t stick around to find out what the “hope” is for, so they cannot possibly be expected to be able to tell you what the “hope” is for. On the other hand, those of us with more *ahem* experience in life have the second part in the forefront of our mind when we hear “hope” – that is, we have an expectation of its fulfillment, and we don’t see that forthcoming based on the “hope”ful candidate’s track record.
Thursday, I may take a look at the “change” part of the equation.
Thank you for stopping by, God bless you all, listen to The O Word on BlogTalkRadio, Wear Red on Fridays, and support Warriors for Innocence!