I remember in 2000 when journalists asked George W Bush and Al Gore what their favorite books were. Bush said his was The Bible. Al Gore said his was The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn. Probably could have called the election right then.
Yes, and irrespective of our opinions on each book... Reading the Bible lets you connect in some form with the majority of your electorate, while reading Kuhn does not.
Its not undercut at all by not winning the popular vote. 81.6% of the electorate identified as Christian in 2001 and 78% by 2012. Thats a clear majority of the electorate.
Being Christian probably neither means that your favorite book is the bible nor that you would rather vote for somebody whose favorite book is the bible.
No one is saying the Bible is the favorite book of Christians nor that its enough to sway votes. The claim was saying his favorite book was the Bible connected him in some form to a majority of the electorate which it did.
They didn't ask what books both men had read - I suspect Gore has read at least a large chunk of the Bible (he still describes himself as a Baptist to this day). It's just not his favorite book.
I always felt like Palin got done dirty when they asked her what she read. Like obviously this is a trick question, and she hadn’t prepared a good answer for it. Who cares? OTOH, she is a nut, so maybe it was fair to stress her out and see if she cracks.
It's difficult to detect sarcasm online, so here goes:
"What do you read to follow the news?" is an incredibly easy question. Even if she doesn't read any newspaper, she could have just named one. "USA Today" is a pretty safe answer that won't offend anyone. Watching Palin struggle with this basic question was painful.
- "I read the Alaska Daily News" ← Small timer, not ready for national stage
- "I read the New York Times" ← Liberal bias, piss off your base
- "I read USA Today" ← A newspaper for babies
- "I read everything" ← Cop out answer and nobody buys it (which is what she said)
- "I read the Wall Street Journal" ← Actually this would be a really good answer because it's national scale and non-liberal, but it's hard to come up with in the moment
The whole point of the question is "reveal something about yourself" but whatever you reveal has positives and negatives that you need to weigh out beforehand. The point of being in the limelight longer is you can burn all your bad answers earlier before anyone cares about them and figure out your strategy.
Someone who feels challenged by the question, "What newspaper do you read?" is not ready for national politics. This is one step above, "What's your favorite food?"
Nobody is going to be that offended by what paper you read. I suggested "USA Today" because it's about the blandest paper you can pick, and nobody can really object to it. Your suggestion, the Wall Street Journal, is not at all difficult to come up with in the moment. It's probably the 2nd or 3rd most influential paper in the US.
Instead of just naming a newspaper, she froze like a deer in the headlights. That just confirmed what many people already thought - she probably reads nothing.
She absolutely read the Alaskan newspaper. It’s silly to suggest otherwise. She may be a nut, but she managed to get elected, and that involves understanding local politics.
asking a vice presidential candidate what they read is not a trick question and if you think it is I'm super curious what you think a vice president does
Wow, you are very lucky to be continually finding books that leave such an impact on you that your _favorite_ book keeps changing. For example, for me, when I was 17, I read what I consider to be ‘The Great American Novel’. No other book has been able to replace that for me.
I think federalism is important. If doing a popular vote, why even have states? A representative republic? Going by popular vote seems like something youd have without states and with a direct democracy.
