Now, imagine explaining to this person that candidates for office put most of their speeches online, along with their entire party platforms. Some candidates would even allow their speeches to be watched live, or saved and watched later, from the tiny supercomputer. Your future self – or whoever – would probably assume that the problem of political ignorance had been cured.

I think about this more and more, because I keep meeting voters who insist, with a sort of hopeless helplessness, that they don’t know “what the candidates stand for.” This past weekend, at the Minnesota State Fair, I kept hearing people complain that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were “mudslinging,” and that this was bad, because they (voters) wanted to hear about the issues.

AD

AD

I thought about this again while reading Jonathan Martin’s story about the black millennials who aren’t inclined to support Hillary Clinton. Some of them have reasons, but the head-turning explaining comes from Nathan Baskerville, a 35-year-old North Carolina state legislator, who says: “We already know what the deal is with Trump. Tell us what your plan is to make our life better.”

What’s remarkable here is that Clinton has frequently talked about her offers to black voters. The first high-profile speech of her campaign, in Manhattan, was about criminal justice reform. “There is something wrong when a third of all black men face the prospect of prison during their lifetimes,” said Clinton. She waged a heated and ultimately successful campaign for black voters in the South, at one point apologizing for a 1996 anti-crime speech where used the pop-sci term “superpredators” to refer to some black teens. She went further just two weeks ago in a speech to the NAACP, which included a quick litany of immediate promises:

Holding police departments like Ferguson accountable. Requiring accurate data on in-custody deaths, like Sandra Bland. Creating clear national guidelines on the use of force, especially lethal force. Supporting independent investigations of fatal encounters with the police.

This is clearly not everything Clinton will "do for" black voters; a voter convinced that she is not trustworthy might not buy it. But whatever reporting value there is in voter conversations, they reveal that plenty of undecided voters have no idea what Clinton has said about criminal justice reform.

AD

AD

Whose fault is that, and whose fault is it swing voters are unsure where Donald Trump stands? Not the media's -- piles and piles of money are spent to get reporters and cameras to the places where candidates deliver policy speeches. Not the candidates's, though in this particular election Clinton has given exponentially more detail than Trump. (Literally, exponentially. CNN's Brian Stelter points out that there are 9,000 words about policy on Trump's campaign site, and more than 100,000 words on Clinton's.) It's true that "candidate gives policy speech" is not a story that gets a front page (unless it's in response to a crisis), and "candidates trade barbs" is. But it is easier than ever for a candidate to shoot his or her message past the media.

No, I'm sorry, but this one falls on the voters. It is generally as easy to learn where the candidates stand on all but the most obscure issues as it is to find, say, a recipe for low-calorie overnight oats. It's also easy to ignore the negative, "mudslinging" aspects of a campaign, for the same reason so many people find it easy to cut their TV plans and watch streaming services.

Yet go to any candidate town hall, and you'll listen as most of the questions ask candidates to repeat what is on their website. Watch those odd ads from the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, asking candidates for "a plan" on Social Security, and you would think neither candidate has proposed entitlement plans. (They have.)

AD

AD

Do you hate the media? If so, two questions: Did you stumble on this page by accident, and what is stopping you from finding out the candidate's record on your own? Two answers: Thank you, and nothing is stopping you.

Sometimes, I think I detect a hipper-than-thou sentiment to this learned ignorance. Politicians are unpopular. The media is unpopular. What is popular is throwing up your hands and saying that All Politicians Are Liars Anyway, and the Candidates Aren't Talking About The Issues. This is a sentiment so banal that "The Simpsons" made fun of it during the first Bill Clinton administration.