Some of these diatribes contain useful information, i.e., policy or
position papers on important matters. For some voters, it is useful to
know that a state organization or union has endorsed a candidate. That
can help with decision making. And some of that information makes its
way into the media, print, radio and TV. Some of it lingers in
cyberspace, clogging inboxes and being deleted unread for the most part.
What's tiresome about the process is the endless back and forth that
goes on between candidates and the endless 24-hour news cycle of the
internet which means candidates' spokespeople are constantly producing a
reaction or a counter attack. Many of these have little to do with any
issue that is critical to the future of Vermont.
Take the issue of how/when gubernatorial candidate Peter Shumlin reveals
his financial statement. Did anyone really need to receive a daily
report that it was Day 1 of his failure to disclose, all the way up to
Day 13? Who is served by that?
Are Shumlin's supporters going to be dissuaded by the daily counting
reminder? Are Shumlin's opponent Brian Dubie's supporters going to
become more firmly Dubie supporters? Not likely.
How about the question of secretary of state candidate Jason Gibb's
whereabouts between when he left a Republican rally at the State House
in Montpelier last week at 8:30 p.m. and 12:45 a.m. when he drove his
car into a ditch.
Any of his opponents going to change their minds because someone has
pointed out that we're now in "Day 5: Gibbs Still Not Transparent About
Accident"? Any of his supporters less likely to support him because of
that?
Surely there are serious issues to talk about during this election
cycle. It does everyone a disservice when the campaigns sink to this
level and it does everyone a further disservice when the media also
sinks to this level.
Let's take it up a notch, shall we?
{loadnavigation}
