Conor: I appreciate your idealism, but I assure you after
spending the last six years covering campaign events--many, if not
most, townhall-type interactions--your faith (and Fallows') in
politically active "ordinary citizens"--an important
distinction from, you know, actual ordinary citizens, my
trailer park brethren, etc.--is severely misplaced. In their
absolute very best moments, most of what "real people" ask at
political events is at least as stupid as what a television
journalist would ask, and usually more so, since they end up trying
to ape whatever the simplistic forumlation of the issue of the day
has been. Virtually everyone plays to type and asks precisely the
question you would suspect they would, to the point where the rare
deviation from the invisible script is shocking. The idea that
anything comparable to Charlie Gibson pressing Obama on the fact
that revenues increase when capital gains taxes are reduced--an
actual public service--or the average episode of Hardball
happens in the vast majority of these forums is pure wishful
thinking.
As far as The People being turned off by such a mean, nasty
debate--that's not happening either. Complaints about the debate
having nothing to do with a burning desire for substance--to
believe Obama is a post-partisan politician of substance is merely
to naively take his word for it--but, rather, concerns over how
one's candidate was wronged or disadvantaged by the debate. These
kind of holier-than-thou complaints are part of the horse race, in
other words. I've seen no evidence out in the "real world" that the
sort of "real people" who follow politics this far out from the
general election are any more interested in thoughtful discussions
on the issues that effect them any more than they really care about
the relative merits of whatever regional football collective they
cheer on. Oh, sure, ask anyone and they'll tell you they can't
stand the fluffy debates and abhor negative campaigning, but it's
always only in the context of wanting people who think differently
than they do to simply yield.
(How many Democrats do you think you'll find taking umbrage at
Obama's insistent, conscious misquoting of McCain? And don't make
me laugh about Drug War questions. The Democratic candidates were
asked about marijuana decriminilzation back along and even on that
mildest of reforms the major candidates
refused to budge--including Obama, whose position has
apparently changed. )
Hence, the focus entirely on the presidential race rather than
local and state level races--these complainers are looking for a
potent ubermensch (or menschette) to vanquish and impose, not
debate intricacies or details.
topics:
Taxes, Television
