Taking Low Information Voting to New Extremes

From TIME's Amy Sullivan:

McCain's let's-postpone-the-debate idea may not be a real possibility now that Obama has indicated he won't play ball. But here's a factor to consider with the proposal itself: by the time the next scheduled (or, as McCain would have it, "first") presidential debate takes place, 16 states will already be voting. That includes battlegrounds like Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, Virginia, and Wisconsin. It's bad enough that voters in a half dozen states are casting ballots right now, before a single debate has been held and after only one opportunity to hear one of the vice-presidential candidates field questions from a reporter. It boggles the mind to think that almost one-third of the country could start voting before Obama and McCain have had the chance to engage directly with each other.

It may seem like the campaign has been going on forever, but up to now it has been limited to carefully-managed pep rallies, misleading attack ads, and a handful of Katie Couric questions. Cynics will argue that debates are only marginally better. But they do allow voters to hear from candidates on the most pressing issues--and, most importantly, for moderators and the candidates themselves to ask critical follow-up questions. It would be a shame if they started a slide into irrelevance, especially when viewership--60 million in 2004--is expected to be at an all-time high.