Nature, a highly respected science journal, has chosen 15 questions about the future of the science field to ask Bush and Kerry. I haven't read through the article yet (it's long), but it should prove to be a fascinating read.
here it is.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Hm. It's kind of a shame that neither candidate was actually interviewed. There's a huge difference between reading a vetted policy statement and hearing what a candidate actually thinks/knows.
Posted by dabbler (Member # 6443) on :
True. Unfortunately, it looks like the responses were written by aides on both sides.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
I'm not sure that's a problem. Neither is a scientist, and even a minor mistake would be jumped on as proof of their unfitness for office. When they make science-related decisions they will have access to their aids.
I hate closed-book tests.
Dagonee
Posted by Turgan (Member # 6697) on :
geeze, that's dorky. I bet you could ask ANY of our presidents those questions and all of them wouldn't know the answers to HALF of them.
Posted by dabbler (Member # 6443) on :
Well, they should know the answer after talking to an aide, reading summaries, discussing it with experts.
I expect more from Presidents than to be diplomatic figureheads. If they get to veto legislation, they should be willing to put the effort into understanding the key factors involved.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
That sounds like you'd be in favor of giving them the questions first so they can prepare.
Dagonee
Posted by dabbler (Member # 6443) on :
Well, if it's a hot topic then I'd expect/hope they'd already be briefed. Like, wouldn't you expect them to have serious opinions about nuclear weapons research at this point?
But asking them about something a little obscure, I would agree a little research time would be appropriate.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
That sounds fair.
Posted by Destineer (Member # 821) on :
It'd be nice if they'd actually answered the questions posed to them, rather than using them as launchpads for silly campaign promises.
Kerry's answer about missile defense is ridiculously concessionary. That program needs to be deleted from our budget immediately.
[ September 16, 2004, 10:20 AM: Message edited by: Destineer ]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"I bet you could ask ANY of our presidents those questions and all of them wouldn't know the answers to HALF of them."
That's a shame. I don't consider myself to be qualified for the presidency of this nation and I feel capable of answering any and all of those questions coherently, without preparation. I'm not exactly an exceptional person; why should the guy running our country be less exceptional than I am?
Posted by fil (Member # 5079) on :
*writes in Tom for president. Hopes he's 35.
fil
Posted by Chaeron (Member # 744) on :
You know, I don't doubt that Al Gore could have coherently answered all of those questions. If only people hadn't percieved him to be a wooden egghead. Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Tom, sorry dude, you are definitely an exceptional person.
AJ
Posted by skeptic (Member # 5273) on :
Since policy issues like this are not things I want my President making off the cuff, I'm glad that they gave both candidates the time to answer thoughtfully. After all, in addition to asking their marketing folks, they probably also consulted the teams that would help make these decisions in a real administration. Thanks for sharing this. I think it provides an excellent side-by-side comparison.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)