|
Edwards got 'outrageous damages' from 'innocent doctors'? That'd be news to me which case(s) was it?
Regardless, I don't think its silly to wait for the debates to finalize your decision. Some like myself and apparantly Ustwo have already pretty firmly made our choice and are ready to vote today. But traditionally, Americans didn't make the choice so early, and I hold those who remain investigative about their choice to this point in high respect.
As I stated before, the vast amount of information/views/perspective that has been put out thus far has been from sources other than the candidates and their campaigns. We hear a lot more from others describing what the candidates are than we hear from the candidates themselves (not for lack of trying).
The choice of who to hold the most influencial single seat in our government is not a decision that should be taken lightly, and we should look forward to the opportunity to make it a more informed decision by following the debates. The fact that so many have made their mind up already is depressing, not encouraging. It is such an unenlightened process, where a few interested parties choose up sides early on and the rest of the voters are swayed by bombardments of hearsay, alarmism, and rhetoric into picking sides along with the true believers, or getting frustrated and simply bowing out of the process all-together. This is certainly good for a lot of folks in power, and most of the true believers on either side can convince themselves its good for them, but I don't think it is good for the country.
Unfortunately, there isn't that much candidates can do about it. 95% of the election-related content out there doesn't come from them, but from the idealogues and the media. The candidate becomes more prominant as the election approaches, and the debates are where the candidates themselves can tap in directly to a wide audience unclipped (at least in the first run through) and unspun. That if nothing else, to me gives the debates value.
|