I watched a few minutes, but by and large, I'm not discussing the debate.
I'm discussing things related to the candidates that I don't have to have seen the debate to discuss.
The debate is still saved on the DVR, too, so I could easily find things that "make sense." That part is still accurate/true.
Every year, something is changed in a club design. The real differences are minimal, assuming your current clubs are from within the last 10 or so years (just throwing out a random number).
However, I just got upgraded to the Ping G driver from the Ping G30, and the big change I noticed is the face of the driver has a bit more friction on the G (at least as I understand it). What it seems to do is reduce side spin, while retaining normal-ish back spin (I use the low-spin tec version). When I miss-hit a drive with my old driver vs the newer one, I see noticeably less slice or hook with the newer version.
When I go through those articles, I mostly read through the reviews of them. It gives a better idea of what might be better.
Right, but then you're just getting into however different people value different things (including money, the performance of their golf clubs, the looks of the golf clubs, the value of a name brand, etc.).
People have different values. For something like this, there's rarely any agreement on those, nor is there any "right" or "wrong" answers.
I use a set of muscle backs that could just as easily be from the 1950s as now. The tech on those isn't really improving much (though the shafts are undoubtedly much better).