Debate and Town Hall hypothetical questions continue to bother me. When Dukakis ran for President, he was pestered to answer what he would do if terrorists threatened to blow up New York City (including his wife) if he did not meet their demands. He deftly pivoted each time to his own soundbite but lost the election anyway. The variables are too many to give a binary answer. On this year’s Nevada stage, Democratic contenders were asked if they would support the candidate with the most delegates if no one attained a majority. Predictably, current favorite Bernie Sanders was the only one of six to commit to that. It should depend. Is the leader two delegates away or hundreds? Is no one else close? Are the leaders separated by one delegate? Did Bernie get his lead and then suffer a heart attack? Did Joe Biden just announce that Hunter Biden would be his Vice President? Did Elizabeth Warren’s tribe just bomb the Tulsa Courthouse on her behalf? Did video surface proving that Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobachar are having an affair? I do not want to support a candidate whose instinct is to make commitments to hypothetical questions without anywhere near enough information. We already have a President who does that. Unequivocal answers to those questions make liars out of politicians. Bernie already committed to reveal more medical records than he can deliver. So what does his commitment mean anyway? Why arm Putin with our useless promises? The candidates have made their positions clear enough, they have records to stand on, and we already know them all better than I can stand.