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.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Vince Cable writes…Labour and Fiscal Rules (Vince Cable)
Josh Babarinde writes…The Lib Dem Summer of Strategy (Josh Babarinde)
Mathew on Monday: “We need to be bold” (Mathew Hulbert)
As a party we must be better defined for the 2029 general election (Chris Bowers)
From national averages to local realities: inequality in our communities (Tom Walker)
Peter Martin Peter Martin Peter Martin 
Peter Davies 
David Wright 
Martin Wainwright's Guardian obituary of Michael Meadowcroft
Evaluating different electoral systems for the House of Commons
Brexit and summer holidays
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).