The rhetorical style used in Presidential debates is absolutely painful. Rather than try to develop a coherent thought, the preference is for rapid-fire, vaguely related factoids. A typical exchange on domestic policy is structured as follows:
Obama: Healthcare factoid, Employment factoid, Energy independence.
McCain: Factoid about Obama's voting record on taxes, spoken in accusatory tone of voice.
Obama: Unrelated factoid about John McCain's policy proposals
McCain: Wistful, rambling old-man story, followed by a one-liner that felt tired when he used it 3 minutes ago.
I'm sure there must be some polling data or focus group report supporting this tactic (or is it a strategy? this is a very important distinction.), but it's mystifying to me. In this debate, the candidates were even given more time to talk out their answers. But they didn't use this time to narrate clear arguments about the economy or their policies, they just ran out the clock cramming as many little semi-related tidbits as they could.
I'm not a swing voter so maybe this appeals to them? Or is it directed more towards the media, with their need for five second clips and their constant refrain about needing more "specifics"?
Things seemed to be getting better when they turned to foreign policy, but then NPR's streaming audio cut out.
Also: when did we collectively decide to forget that John McCain was, as recently as this morning, bizarrely threatening to not show up for the debates? It wasn't that long ago!
No comments:
Post a Comment