Politics, News & Issues >
Presidential Elections 2008
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedHillary plants questions in Iowa: Is it a big deal if a politician plants questions during town hall sessions?
Results so far:
| Yes | 50% | 3 votes | Total: 6 votes | |
| No | 50% | 3 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesPlanting questions is hardly a new phenomenon in the world of sales (which, arguably, a presidential campaign qualifies as). Many a canny businessman has seeded a crowd with people to ask him exactly the sort of questions he wants to answer. Is a candidate doing the same truly a big deal then? Yes, absolutely.
George Bush is famous for giving speeches only to sympathetic audiences that lob him such softball questions as "What can I do to help you?" and "I thank god for you everyday." While this is wonderful for stroking the ego of a candidate, it does little to accomplish the goal of such a forum, namely, exposing the ideas of the person in question to critical examination.
If you look at the decision making process used by most successful entities, be they business, governmental or even personal, most assertions need to be exposed to critical thought in order to truly be vetted as worthwhile. If you have an idea, you owe it to yourself to make sure it can stand up to a bit of scrutiny. If someone wants something from you, be it money, a favor, or a vote, it had best make sure that it makes sense to give them what they want.
That's what a "town hall" meeting is essentially supposed to be, an open forum to answer the questions of the public and make the case that a plan is worthy of being adopted. People view these sessions as the proving ground of ideas, they are, as such, an essential tool to examining closely our politicians. Sabotaging that process makes the decision making process of elections less efficient and less likely to generate the answer of most benefit to the country. It also misleads voters, something a politician should never knowingly engage in, especially if they're trying to bill themselves as the responsible hand of good government. Making people think you have a mastery of a topic when really you were just never asked any hard questions is deceitful and leads to voters building assumptions on inaccurate premises.
If Hillary Clinton has good ideas for moving the country for it, she should be willing to expose them to critical examination. If they stand up to the questions of a truly unbiased public, then her case will be made far better than if she tries to hamfistedly do it through subterfuge and deceit.
Learn more about this author, Bryan Jennings.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
This week, Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton admitted that questions had been planted during her speech in Iowa. Clinton has been widely criticised for her actions, not by Republicans, but by a current Democratic candidates, and a former runner in the race to the White House, a member of her own party, Senator John Kerry, who claimed that during his campaign at the last election, prearranged questions were not planted during his speeches. But while Kerry and the current Democratic candidates dress-down Hillary for her actions, I think one must look more realistically at the issues they are each running on.
Did Senator Clinton sanction the planting of questions? Yes. Does it harm the campaign or in any way damage or mislead the people or tamper with the result of the primary elections? No.
Voters are being asked to decide on candidates based on the issues as well as the person standing. Hillary is merely presenting her issues, the issues that she believes are important to America, - through people who also agree with her positions.
Strategic questions have always been used to spark off debates and thoughts in the minds of the voters. The questions asked are usually emotive and draw mixed views among the crowds. Yes, the planting of questions is done to aid the candidate, but sometimes the questions, as indeed the answers, can backfire on anyone, any time.
Hillary Clinton is fighting a campaign for the President, not the party poll for favouritism. Her campaign centres on broad issues and she must use every minute to tell the people of those issues if she wishes to get elected.
If all that the Clintons are guilty of is planting questions, then I look forward to seeing a clean campaign without negative adverts. But I personally don't believe that the other candidates haven't planted questions themselves in either Hillary's speeches, or their own. If they haven't, and Hillary has had the intelligence to do so, then the only reason the other candidates are bleating now is because they are more afraid than ever that Hillary Clinton will win the Democratic nomination.
Learn more about this author, Richard E. Grant.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Presidential Elections 2008
- Who won the second presidential debate, McCain or Obama?
- Should the next President raise taxes or cut programs to help pay off the national debt?
- Who won the third presidential debate, Obama or McCain?
- Who would make a better US president?
- Do you think that the next US president should meet with Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions?
- Should fighting climate change be a priority to the next President?
