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
Conference from the other side of the barrier (Barry Rhodes)
Proper Grimond liberalism (Jack Meredith)
Is Conference still supreme? (John Kelly)
Ed Davey’s Conference speech (Hugh Andrew)
Conference or What? (Roderick Lynch)
Smugglers and pirates in Gower
New crematorium evacuated just weeks after opening as firefighters rush to scene
Lib Dems just miss out on another council by-election gain.
Surgery tomorrow
Let me eat cake
Buried alive: A 1954 rescue of a teenager from a Surrey chalk cave
Lord Bonkers' foreword to the new Liberator Songbook
The continuing cost of Brexit
Chloe 
Katharine Pindar 
Neil Fawcett 
Tim Rogers 
Jeff 
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).