|
As for the presidential debates, I am making one commitment, and encouraging others to do the same: Watch the debates, live on TV, or on replay if you can't tune in at the time, and then don't watch any of the post-debate coverage, but instead spend some time yourself or with others who are watching it with you analyzing the questions and responses before giving the talking heads an opening.
Far too much of the information we base our decisions on comes not from the candidates but from others filtering the candidates' messages. Think about it. Count all the info you've taken in about candidates and the race. From the candidates, their officials, supposed allies, supposed enemies, media commentators and reporters, your friends and other associates, humorists, this forum, the list goes on. I try and pay attention to direct information from the Kerry and Bush campaigns, but even I would have a hard time figuring that more than 5-10% of all of the info I've heard is from the candidate or even their campaign directly.
Often you hear swing voters ask when the candidates are going to get to the issues. They haave been talking about issues, but for example, Kerry can spend 45 minutes at a union hall talking about his economic and health care plans, take 3 minutes to refute an attack ad, and the headline is "Kerry Speaks to Union; Attacks New Ad: Kerry spoke before Union people today, and strongly rejected claims by *** about *** and attacking his ***. Senator Kerry's *** has been questioned by the *** repeatedly over the last six months....... and so on. The fact he elaborated on other matters is mentioned on page B12. Bush is faced with similar treatment.
The debates is an opportunity for all to hear directly from the horse's mouth, so I feel the best way to do it is to keep it clear of those commentators who can't wait to get back to the filter and spin after the closing statements: 'Would these guys just get done so we can get back to telling the people our version of what they said?'
|