Maybe I Just Feel Like Being Contrary Today
Lots of starboard-leaning blogs (including many of my favorites) are ragging Hillary for the planting of questions in the audiences at her stump speeches.
Please carefully note that I think the practice of planting questions is dishonest, and I don't condone it at all. But in the overall spectrum of what's wrong with politicians and political campaigning, this ranks fairly low. While I have no data, at a gut level I suspect this kind of thing happens very frequently at campaign stops for politicians of all stripes. It's a relatively stupid kind of dishonesty as well - if a candidate wants to talk about an issue he/she needn't wait for a question.
Let me graphically illustrate my opinion. The dishonest practice of planting questions is larger than this:
But much smaller than this:
Far more worrisome would be flooding the audiences with planted questions in order to shield the candidate from the ordinary citizens' questions. So far, this hasn't been suggested by accounts I've seen.
So, I'm going to differ with my linked-above peers and say that this shouldn't be a big deal.
There's plenty of substantive things to post about when looking at the Democratic candidates and their destructive platforms. This shouldn't be among them.
This post was blocked by Blogrolling.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Maybe I Just Feel Like Being Contrary Today.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.dontgointothelight.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/5257



Planting a few questions is a standard practice. It can often serve to get more unplanted questions than if you hadn't planted questions to begin with, as no one likes to go first. Plant a question or two and that takes the pressure off people.
As you say, if the questions weren't so numerous that it kept legitimate audience participation out, there's no big deal here.