I suspect most politicians have used the “it’s a hypothetical question” reason to avoid answering a question. Over at Slate there’s an interesting piece praising Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama for his enthusiasm in answering hypotheticals, which very much sets him out from the crowd.
Hat tip: Comment Central.
Share:
New Who Post On Mindless Ones
Boltzmann And Boltzwomann
'This NHS Bill is Bad...' My latest blog post for The Huffington Post!
A departure from tradition at the Islington Liberal Democrats new year party...
Friday favourite 45
LibDem Activists Need to Relax Too, Sometimes
Off for training in the morning...
Dowery Dell viaduct and the Southwell branch: Midlands railway gold
The Art of War: On analysis
A letter to MLB.TV
2 Comments
Some might say he’s slightly oer enthusiatic – he’s made several gaffs as a result of this not least coming out and saying that he wont use nuclear weapons ‘under any circumstances’ – which is certainly a welcome statement but not necessarily a sensible one for a future President of the United States.
I think that in answer to Mark’s point there are some that make sense to answer (for example, “If you were to have a vacancy for the Supreme Court who would you look to as a model Justice?”) and some, such as the nuclear question, that are probably best avoided for the reason Letterman hints at.
Giving too much detail in answer to hypotheticals though only risks offending your supporters. Obama is in a situation where it is in his interests to do so to show how different he is. No such benefit would be had for Hilary Clinton for instance (whose main appeal will be the “experienced and pragmatic” card).