By avoiding details there's only so much anybody can say about his plans with regard to taxes. He's avoiding talking about Social Security, for instance, because politicizing it with details is bad for campaigning. McCain's answers are from the classic Rove textbook that got George Bush elected - when asked a question, repeat the closest talking point you have. That way there are only a handful of things to quote you on, but nobody can say you didn't reply even if the reply seems as though you may have missed the question.Senator McCain's not too old to serve; he proved he's not to old to amuse bikers in Sturgis by suggesting his wife enter a topless pageant, either. But is he too experienced to win a campaign in the era when pundits no longer dominate access to information?
Is "experience" actually McCain's achilles heel?
Obama's been so up front with his answers that it's shocked people. Pundits assert he's too nuanced, and there's no question that his opposition can grab sound-bites out of context and run with them. But this is the era of Snopes, and Google, whether McCain knows it or not. Facts may be hard to come by, but they're out there - and so if voters want the information, it's there to be found.It's an election cycle full of irony - Many of the charges the McCain camp has leveled at Obama turn out to be indicative of areas they fear they'll be attacked. Have Snopes & Google given the U.S. voters facts to debunk spin?
So the 3 questions are:
- Is this the year that voters fight back against old-school political tactics?
- Is John McCain's campaign style evidence that he's been in DC too long?
- Is the infornation superhighway sufficiently integrated into the lives of U.S. voters that we finally face an election where facts matter more than spin and perception?
