As a septuagenarian (and Democrat), I was happy that President Barack Obama won re-election, but sad that the morning-after TV news shows reported the win as "the election results validated the Obama team's game plan," rather than the election was the result of a real choice of the American people ("Re-election," Nov. 7).
Our elections are now reported by commentators who appear to have been trained primarily as sportscasters and who speak of who "wins" rather than who was elected, how many points ahead or behind a candidate's "game plan" may be and generally cover campaigns as sporting events. We were inundated with daily electoral sporting reports for more than a year but rarely treated to many details of candidates' positions on key issues.
This is not the way to elect presidents, in my opinion. I remember in civics classes over 50 years ago (a class I understand no longer exists in many U.S. high schools today) that our founding fathers feared a popularity contest to elect a chief executive and set up a "collegiate search committee" — the Electoral College with respected persons in the community traveling to Washington in early December every four years to make a final choice. The electors would interview potential prospects and select the most competent person to lead. One of their hopes was to avoid political parties, but that, of course, did not come to pass!
David Sliney, Fallston