Who Taught J. R.?

J.R. Jones is at it again. He starts his review of Swing Vote thus:

If you’re as hooked on coverage of the presidential campaign as I am, you’re probably aware of a pernicious new euphemism that’s crept into the political lexicon: low-information voters. As an abuse of the English language, this may not rank with advanced interrogation techniques, but it still raises my blood pressure every time I hear it. I believe the more precise terminology is ignorant clowns. That may sound cruel, but if the media showed less sensitivity to such people, perhaps there wouldn’t be quite so many of them. Unlike blindness or retardation, ignorance is easily cured.

1) Not everyone is equally interested in the campaign. Some people like to lead their lives differently, and that's a good thing.

2) Guess what--even if these people spent all their time educating themselves on the issues, they're just as likely to vote one way as the other (though J.R. may not believe this) so what's the point? A highly-informed voter seems to be about as likely to vote stupidly as someone who just gets the basic messages of the candidates.

3) As opposed to the plot of Swing Vote, your single vote doesn't actually matter that much. It's quite rational not to be overly informed if all you're gonna do with that information is vote. Better for you (and the nation at large) to spend your time doing stuff that makes you money or brings you pleasure.

4) If the media paid more attention to this phenomenon, I doubt it would make much difference. (I suppose it might teach people like Mr. Jones not to be so concerned about this issue.) Even if you thought the media could do a good job impartially informing voters, let's recall the voters you're referring to are already avoiding this information. In fact, all the information anyone would want is out there, and more easily attainable than ever before--has that helped?

5) There's always been a fair amount of ignorance among voters. (There's been more self-interest--is that bad too? Because if you think it is, might as well give up on democracy.) In fact, the more of its citizens America has allowed to vote--and that's been the trend throughout our history--the more "ignorant clowns" are allowed to vote. (This is likely so on a percentage basis--it's certainly so for raw numbers.) If you truly want less ignorant clowns voting, what you want is to limit the electorate to, say--I don't know--white male landowners?