Reply #15: You just don't understand. The goal is to sift through everything -- [View All]

all media reports, blogs, interviews, debates, photos, gossip, notes on cocktail napkins -- whatever you can find as evidence, however minute, that your glorious candidate's scumbag opponent is unworthy. Maybe he/she rolled his/her eyes, or laughed in a way that could be interpreted as slightly mocking if heard from the other side of the room, or maybe he/she appeared in public with lint on his/her clothing (proving he/she is a disgusting slob), or maybe he/she said something that somebody else said they meant something that could be interpreted as racist/ sexist/pro-Republican/ anti-something you are for, and somebody even blogged about how terrible it was, so it really must mean your candidate's opponent is evil/ weak/ bad/ stupid/ irrelevant/ naive/ a corporatist shill/ a left-wing loon/ a useless asshole. Once you have "proved" the badness of your candidate's opponent, you can then bask in the glory that candidate's reflected light shines on your sorry little ego, now that you've proved your political judgment is superior to that of those fools who support that *other* horrible loser candidate.

Real issues are for people who don't pay attention to the nuances.

:sarcasm: