Archive: Opinions

EditorialI really liked the Presidential Debate.  That is, I liked the local version that took place between Tompkins County party chairs Mike Sigler (Republican) and Irene Stein (Democrat) last week.  Going in I thought that unltra-liberal downtown Ithaca would be a tough room for Sigler, but the event was well planned, nicely moderated, respectful of all poiints of view, and worked well.  The result was an issue-based debate that didn't get negatively personal, and allowed each side to air its views in a substantive way.

As a journalist this was bad for me.  No real zingers, no screaming headlines, no manufactured drama to report on.  But for society at large it was exactly what is needed.  I think the polls show how fickle the electorate is.  One day McCain is ahead.  The next day Obama takes the lead.  Their leads bounce up and down like a teeter totter.  My conclusion is that people are treating the election as a popularity contest more than a serious issues-based choice.

That's bad, because good leaders aren't necessarily the most attractive ones.  I think that President Kennedy may have ruined politics for issues in a way, because he was the first successful television candidate.  Who would deny that the young, attractive Kennedy with his inspirational oratory skills cut a much more attractive figure than Richard Nixon?

Yet before the advent of television it was more about issues than personality and looks.  Most Americans didn't even know that President Roosevelt was in a wheelchair.

The other problem is that with 24/7 television news networks they have to fill the time whether there is interesting news or not.  I like the pundits to a point, but because the campaign has been going on for so long I now get a physical reaction of revulsion when I hear the talking heads opining on the campaigns.  I am so anxious for it to be all over that I frequently check CampaignCountdown.com to see if somehow the time before we vote has magically and mercifully been shortened.  Alas, it hasn't.

I had a good laugh after the debate between Senators McCain and Obama Tuesday night, because a Fox poll was showing that McCain had blown Obama out of the water, while a CNN poll showed the opposite.  There really haven't been any exciting moments in the three national debates so far, but there has been the expected hammering on bullet point issues that deflect intelligent debate.  And I have to say that the national debate formats have been somewhat stunting, keeping the candidates bottled up in their three minute bubbles.  Not allowing them to actually debate.

I preferred our local flavor.  Like everyone else I more or less agree with one side and disagree with the other.  But both sides scored points with me, because they largely avoided the bullet point approach, opting instead to speak from the heart, saying things they had obviously mulled over at length before coming to their own independent conclusions.  Even the person I don't politically agree with made points in a way I hadn't thought of before, making me challenge my assumptions and think more about the direction I really want to see this country go in.

Even if I don't get a screaming headline, that's the way I wish elections could be.  I am not naive enough to think that, with so much at stake, candidates would give up their chance to hammer us with talking points, negative ads, and -- on both sides -- outright lies.  But I can't help thinking we would get better presidents if they did.

----
v4i39