The Case For Taking Campaign Rhetoric Seriously

Vox’s Libby Nelson took to Twitter yesterday with some interesting responses to my post about how she had covered Hillary Clinton’s school reform critique:

“Trying not to be defensive, but I’m puzzled by the idea that we shouldn’t take Clinton’s education talk seriously.”

“What’s the point of covering policy in a campaign if we assume that policy talk is just easily disregarded campaign promises?”

“I don’t think political science can necessarily explain *everything* but this is convincing to me.”

“Anyway, 1) Clinton isn’t just saying this stuff to unions 2) As far as I know, she’s not having roundtables with DFER, etc.”

I’m not convinced that campaign rhetoric should be covered so directly, but I appreciate her sharing her thoughts (and no doubt many will agree with them).

Related posts: Different Ways To Cover Clinton Campaign Rhetoric.

Support the Washington Monthly and get a FREE subscription

Alexander Russo

Alexander Russo is a freelance education writer who has created several long-running blogs such as the national news site This Week In Education, District 299 (about Chicago schools), and LA School Report. He can be reached on Twitter at @alexanderrusso, on Facebook, or directly at