The “dullest campaign ever”?

A few weeks ago David Brooks opined that this is the “dullest [presidential] campaign ever.” As he puts it: “It’s incredibly consequential and incredibly boring all at the same time.” He lists ten reasons for this, including the following:

Has there ever been a campaign with so few major plans on the table? President Obama’s proposals are small and medium-size retreads, while Mitt Romney has run the closest thing to a policy-free race as any candidate in my lifetime. Republicans spend their days fleshing out proposals, which Romney decides not to champion.

The whole article is worth a read. What do you all think? Is this the “dullest campaign ever”?

To me, the most potentially “exciting” part of this campaign has been the exceptional nature of the religious affiliation of the four major party candidates. For the first time in history, we don’t have a single Anglo-Saxon Protestant on either ticket. And yet this has become a much smaller part of the campaign narrative than I was originally anticipating. Perhaps this will change after the conventions… but I doubt it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s