In Defense of Nuance

I am sick of the notion that American voters can't process nuanced arguments. To wit, two such declarations have become common in recent weeks on the campaign trail.

First, there is the argument that says President Obama can't trust voters to understand economic trends beyond a fourth grade level. The conversation usually starts with a talking head invoking that familiar political question, "Are you better off now than four years ago?" President Obama, they explain, can't simply say yes or no. He has to explain to voters that no matter who was president, we were going to be worse off in less than four years time. That's because the economic cake was baked with such poison that it had to work itself out of our system first. And there was some serious Rolaids relief needed following that flare-up. So the president has to say, "We're not technically better off, but we're in better shape than we might otherwise be, and we're moving in the right direction." Then the pundits almost laugh, amused at the thought of voters un-pretzeling their little brains with that one.

"Too nuanced!" they scoff. "Voters need easy questions and answers. They don't like anything complicated."

You know what I say to that? To the people who think that Americans don't waste time understanding policy and waste all their time on pop culture and teleivions? Yes, this is the country of Gossip Girl. But it's also the country that made Lost a megahit, and that was one seriously complicated show.

Second, we've heard those same pundits bemoaning the fate of poor Mitt Romney over the last week. After all, Romney has to root for the economy to suffer. Otherwise, he loses his argument that he's best suited to pilot the country. And with the surge in jobs numbers and the markets hopping, Mitt Romney is losing his argument. If the economy continues to bounce back, Romney would have to say, "Yes, the economy is recovering, but it's not recovering quite as quickly as it would if the policies were different. And it will recover even more effectively with me in charge!"

"Too nuanced!' they snicker. "Voters need easy questions and answers. They don't like anything complicated."

But what if Obama is right? And what is Romney is right? Why are their arguments lampooned simply because they rely on a bit more complexity than we're accustomed to? Why isn't it possible for Americans to understand that this country was knee-capped in 2007 and 2008, and was going to take a short fall no matter who was in charge? And why isn't it possible for Americans to consider whether alternative policies would improve an already-improving economy?

I can be pretty cynical. But give people more credit than that. This is an important year. If we enter the election season already convinced that voters are idiots, we'll have no chance to have substantive conversations.