Good ‘Blog arguments are interesting because the participants are sophisticated enough to spare each other the usual faulty reasoning and informed enough not to quibble too much about the premises. Because of this, and because the ‘Blogoholics are less likely to be as simply tribal and cautious as politicians, debates on ‘Blog comments pages can, on occasion, be gripping. Most importantly, unlike those involved in the imminent presidential debates, the protagonists are invisible. If I had to give one piece of advice to Kerry now it would be this: “This is not a race or an exam; remember that you are in a popularity contest now.”
30Sep04 — 4
[…] have let me commit it all to MiniDisc. Then to Oxford, for a big retirement do. To answer Backword Dave’s question lunch with Chris Brooke was excellent, thank you. Though it […]
Popularity contest? If that was really the case, he should have known better than to leave the unaccountabely safe environs of his junior Massachusettes seat in the Senate.
Mr. Neal is correct, though, high school debates are far more competitive than the uber-structured debates these two agreed to. It’s somewhat embarrassing, these things should be wide-open or not be at all. Ultimately, most people know these are put-ons, and they already know their positions anyway.
Kerry has already been imploding. Tonight wasn’t “won” by Bush, but it was certainly “lost” by Kerry. The man embodies pure undirected ambition. It’s the undirected part that bothers me terribly.
So how was lunch with Chris Brooke?
For a more nuanced take on the debate you might check out that recovering Tory Andrew Sullivan’s Oct. 2 posting. The buzz around here is all about Bush’s weened-on-a-lemon facial expression during the reaction shots. The mask slips.