Debates Reveal More About The Audience Than the Opponents

Originally written during the fall 2008 elections on 9-27-08

On the heels of the first 2008 presidential debates, the polls and opinions are in:

Hold on to your seats: Most Republicans thought McCain won. Most Democrats thought Obama won. This is absolutely shocking! How much money did they pay the pollsters to solicit that information? Hey, maybe I can be a pollster. I wouldn’t even need to talk with anyone. I’d just print the results, and in the time I was supposedly interviewing people, I’d hit the beach and do some body surfing.

But my favorite moments were listening to why McCain supposedly lost.

1) He looked too old.
2) He waved his hands like George Bush.
3) He didn’t look at Obama once.
4) He referred to his opponent as, Senator Obama. But Obama was personal enough to call him, John.

And why did people feel Obama did well?

1) He looked presidential.
2) He looked calm and collected. He did not get as heated up as McCain.

If only debates could be put into manuscript form, we would be forced to defend our opponents on ideas alone. In fact, that might not be a bad suggestion. No more televised debates! People must read them and pass a written exam, proving they read them. Then, only those people would be allowed to vote.

I guess not. Somebody would call it racism. Exactly why it would be racism, I’m sure I don’t know, but somebody would say it, so we will never do it.

This is Bob Siegel, making the obvious, obvious.

Share this on FacebooktwitterredditlinkedinmailFacebooktwitterredditlinkedinmail