Odd, Isn't It?

For some time now it seems to have been the case that the Presidential Campaigns, in particular, are always either brilliant (the winner) or incompetent (the loser). Once upon a time, the ratings agencies (the news reporters, actually), gave at least a wink and a nod to the voters as the determining factor in the election. But No More! Now, it's all about the Marketing Of The President. Madison Avenue is entirely to blame (the loser), or entirely credited (the winner) for the results of the polling. At the polls, I mean, not in the pollsters Polls. Odd that this is not also true of the down-ticket campaigns. Sometimes, though not always, the Candidate or the Issue is allowed to succeed/fail on its own merits. Sort of like the old-fashioned concept of Participatory Democracy, where the people decide on their own who and what they want government to be. Instead of the Campaigns holding the voters in total thralldom.
No real point to be made here; it's entirely possible that the Miniscule Machiavellis of Madison Av. are correct in their self-indulgent evaluation: The Boobocracy is competely dominated by marketing! That would be a shame, I think. The President really should be elected based on a serious evaluation of the candidates. Who Knows - perhaps that is the reality, and voters do in fact vote their own minds, rather than following the direction of the marketing wizards.
NAH!
But one thing I do know - I do love alliteration.