American politics are in some ways very similar to American sports - there's commentators galore, piles of statistics, and, most importantly, far too much money.
OK, so I don't give two hoots about sport in general, let alone American sports, but I think there's something in this - certainly, these factors make American politics a hell of a lot more interesting to watch, particularly because the rules are far more complex than any sport, the stakes are so much higher, and political commentary is a lot more meaningful than sports commentary, at least to me.
Anyway, with the primaries heating up, this promises to be an exciting political season - there's no nominated successor for the incumbent, the Republicans, having lost the House and Senate last time are champing at the bit to get it back, and almost all of the candidates are at least pretending to be interested in new ways of engaging with the electorate via the internet. The issues are hot, there's two, maybe three wars at stake, not to mention crazy mad oil prices, growing indicators of climate change and a weak US economy. Not to mention the ongoing spectre of electronic voting machines and other possible reasons for allegations of electoral fraud..
Mark my words - this should be an exciting match.
For those who aren't sick of the sports analogy, yet, I have one question - why don't the parties have cheerleaders? I'm sure that would increase voter turnout some..
Seriously though, US politics, by virtue of their global impact, convolution, and generally comic nature, are always fun to read about. Furthermore, since I'm hoping to be studying in the US as of later this year, I have a vested interest in how this turns out.
For the last three political cycles, I've relied heavily on the awesome interactive tools and political commentary provided by the New York Times. Even if I didn't care about politics, the way they use visualizations to present descriptive statistical data on this scale would be to keep me going back. |