# Presidential Debate - Why do Americans Allow This? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [October 18, 2012, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129 "2012-10-18T14:34:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2012, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/21 "2012-10-18T16:18:52Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > Pointing out examples of other lying and manipulative industries doesn’t make the first one “reasonable” or okay. In this case, yes, it does. Coke isn’t lying or manipulating when they fail to state that their beverage ruins peoples’ teeth. Obama isn’t lying or manipulating when he doesn’t point out that there were millions of jobs lost during the early part of his Administration. It is outrageously unrealistic to expect that anyone would seek to promote themselves or their product by presenting pro/con arguments, as opposed to the well accepted practice of accentuating one’s positives. I know for certain that the last time I interviewed for a job, I did not say, “I show up to work on time, I work hard, and I’m creative, but sometimes I’m distracted at work during slow times with debates on the Straight Dope Message Board, plus I’m really grouchy in the morning.” Nobody but nobody is expected to “sell” themselves in such a manner as the OP seems to want, and that includes consumer products, politicians, job interviewees, couples who are dating, or anyone else doing virtually anything else. I’m not excusing blatant lying or fabrications, but if you can’t deal with people presenting things in the most favorable light for their own interests, it’s time to pack up and move out to a Unabomer shack in the woods, because spin is totally part of human nature. Everyone does it. If the common person applies a little spin in their own life, that’s overlooked; if a politician applies spin, he’s a lying liar who lies. ---
**Author:** ![tim314](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim314/32/3468_2.png) [@tim314](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim314)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2012, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/22 "2012-10-18T16:28:36Z")
> [@Gangster\_Octopus](#): > > I think we are not responding correctly to the OP. The OP isn’t asking why candidates do it, but why we seem to let it go unchallenged. The thing is, we don’t really let it go unchallenged. Media outlets will publish “fact check” articles after the debates, lies get pointed out on Internet forums like this one, etc. What more should we be doing? Refusing to vote for anyone who’s ever distorted the truth to try to get elected? That would pretty much eliminate every politician. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2012, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/23 "2012-10-18T18:00:39Z")
> [@chargerrich](#): > > Two examples of such laughable manipulation: > > Obama claimed that he created 5.2 million jobs in the last 31 months, but of course fails to mention that this was only AFTER losing almost that same amount earlier in his term. Add to this the unemployment rate being almost unchanged and accounting for population growth and this “stat” is misleading at best and designed to fool uneducated voters. I don’t agree that this is manipulation, unless it has been established that Obama “lost” almost 5.2 million jobs in the first year of his term. Note that that number of jobs being lost in that period of time is not the same thing as Obama losing those jobs. ---
**Author:** ![drewtwo99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d07c76/32.png) [@drewtwo99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewtwo99)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2012, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/24 "2012-10-18T19:19:16Z")
Yeah, I’m sorry but this outrage is completely misplaced. It is no candidate’s responsibility to point out their pros and cons. If it upsets you that a politician will only point out good things about themselves, you really need to chill out. People don’t go into a job interview and give the pros and cons of why they should or shouldn’t be hired. An effective ad campaign doesn’t go on about the good and bad points of a product. And candidates should not be held to the standard of having to point out their good and bad qualities. ---
**Author:** ![rsat3acr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a3d4f5/32.png) [@rsat3acr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rsat3acr)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2012, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/25 "2012-10-18T23:45:29Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > Not sure there is a factual answer for your question, so I’ll throw out my opinion along with the others posed here. > > The answer is that most Americans are stupid. They gravitate towards soundbites and tend to believe what they hear. Polls and history have proven this to be true. The candidates just work the system that exists. They attribute blame and claim responsibility for lots of things outside of their own control. It’s called politics. I don’t think it is so much that Americans are stupid, but that they are lazy. It takes a bit of work to make an informed choice but only a few seconds to hear a soundbite. ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2012, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/26 "2012-10-19T02:23:40Z")
> [@Bakhesh](#): > > It’s hardly naive. In the UK, Politicians will do anything to draw attention away from bad figures, by letting their spin doctors loose on it. They might release them on a busy news day, or try and interpret them differently, but if they started just making stuff up, there would be calls for their resignation pretty quickly. This is a feature of the difference between the political systems of the two countries. The UK only recently began to have public debate between candidates for PM because the election isn’t really a contest between those candidates but between parties. The PM is responsible to their party and to the Commons. In the US the president is independent of the legislature and his party and is essentially answerable to no one until his term is over. A call for the president to resign would not only be highly unusual but meaningless. And in the campaign the candidates are each independent and won’t agree to a debate if they think the format won’t be favorable to them. If a moderator promised to stop the debate and call out a candidate any time one of then made a false statement, he’d find he had an empty stage. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2012, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/27 "2012-10-19T02:26:48Z")
> [@chargerrich](#): > > However that being said, after watching all the debates this year, I cannot help but wonder why so many voters put up with such obvious double speak and manipulation of facts on ALMOST EVERY point. Not all voters “put up” with it. 45% or so of people of voting age do not vote. Some just don’t care. I suspect quite a lot don’t want to pick an evil, whether lesser or not. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2012, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/28 "2012-10-19T02:51:29Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Not all voters “put up” with it. 45% or so of people of voting age do not vote. Some just don’t care. I suspect quite a lot don’t want to pick an evil, whether lesser or not. I don’t know how to quantify “quite a lot” in this statement, but however you do so the percentage of eligible voters who actually vote has not changed significantly for the past 100 years as you can see by [this chart](http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/turnout.php). In fact, the percentage took a sudden dip to modern values in the election of 1912, an election in which there were four major candidates. I would make the case, therefore, that increasing the number of parties reduces voting by sowing more confusion. The other election with four parties was 1948 and that election had the lowest percentage between 1924 and 1980. (Longer if you assume that the 19th amendment artificially lowered percentages until voting became standard for women as well as men.) I’m sure there are many people who don’t vote because they say they don’t care for the process of politics - whether this is true or merely the excuse they use we’ll never know. My opinion is that the lack of viable national third parties has little or nothing to do with it and never has. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2012, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/29 "2012-10-19T02:55:15Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > I don’t know how to quantify “quite a lot” in this statement, but however you do so the percentage of eligible voters who actually vote has not changed significantly for the past 100 years as you can see by [this chart](http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/turnout.php). Neither has the politicians’ lying, or the “choice between two evils” at the polls. Or “four evils” on rare occasions. Vote for Cthulhu. Why settle for “lesser” evil? ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2012, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/30 "2012-10-19T03:14:13Z")
> [@chargerrich](#): > > Obama claimed that he created 5.2 million jobs in the last 31 months, but of course fails to mention that this was only AFTER losing almost that same amount earlier in his term. Add to this the unemployment rate being almost unchanged and accounting for population growth and this “stat” is misleading at best and designed to fool uneducated voters. > > Romney stated that Obama has doubled the deficit, which is simply untrue unless you are willing to lay the 1.2 trillion debt inherited by Obama as “his”. How ironic that your examples of politicians being illogical and inconsistent are themselves, when taken in combination, illogical and inconsistent, insofar as the point raised in the latter (that the events of Obama’s early term reflect the results of the previous administration’s\* actions) seriously undercuts the point raised in the former. \*I do not name Obama’s predecessor – apparently (if the careful silence of his old political colleagues is any indication) daring to utter his name will unleash a plague of locusts or darken the sun or otherwise bring doom upon the land. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2012, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/31 "2012-10-19T03:20:45Z")
> [@chargerrich](#): > > Let me preface this post by saying I make no leans to one side of the aisle or another, my frustration is fully bi-partisan. > > However that being said, after watching all the debates this year, I cannot help but wonder why so many voters put up with such obvious double speak and manipulation of facts on ALMOST EVERY point. Both candidates will stand up and take EXACT opposite sides of the same issue backed with diametrically opposed facts that are so obviously manipulated that a 5th grader could sniff out the deception. > > Two examples of such laughable manipulation: > > Obama claimed that he created 5.2 million jobs in the last 31 months, but of course fails to mention that this was only AFTER losing almost that same amount earlier in his term. Add to this the unemployment rate being almost unchanged and accounting for population growth and this “stat” is misleading at best and designed to fool uneducated voters. > > Romney stated that Obama has doubled the deficit, which is simply untrue unless you are willing to lay the 1.2 trillion debt inherited by Obama as “his”. > > While I understand that they are both out to “win”, its amazing to me that so very little time is spent by the candidates just HONESTLY talking and discussing what you really stand for and support as opposed to throwing out double speak and forcing voters to engage in the exercise of sort truth from lies. > > I know this all sounds naive and its nothing new, but it appears to become much worse in recent years. Well, about 30 years ago the debates were run by an independent organization and the political parties didn’t like having their candidates actually moderated by journalists who kept them relatively honest (regarding their record or what they said), then the parties took over the debates and that journalistic integrity more or less evaporated (apparently across the board and not just in debates). ---
**Author:** ![camille](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/22d042/32.png) [@camille](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/camille)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2012, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/32 "2012-10-19T03:57:56Z")
> [@Kinthalis](#): > > Wouldn’t it be cool to have something like Watson (the computer that played on Jeopardy) moderate one of these debates and cut in everytime a lie or stretching of the truth, or obfuscation of the facts occurred? > > I’d pay money to see that. Instead of that CNN Undecided Voter Graph, I’d like to see the results of candidates being hooked up to a polygraph during the debate. In addition, they would be hooked up to receive a small shock if they break the rules of the debate, speak over the designated time, or ignore the moderator’s instructions. Bet a lot of people would pay to see that. ---
**Author:** ![littlespeedysuperbike](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/53a042/32.png) [@littlespeedysuperbike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/littlespeedysuperbike)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2012, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/33 "2012-10-19T04:56:45Z")
A small brown penalty flag should pop up from the podium for a flagrant lie. The candidate may swat it down if he chooses after ten seconds. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2012, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/34 "2012-10-19T05:06:43Z")
> [@Nancy M. Neuman](#): > > The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates…because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates’ organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public. The debates are run by the Democrat- and Republican-controlled Commission on Presidential Debates. Hence why the Greens and Libertarians aren’t invited, and why important questions (like “How do you justify prosecuting John Kiriakou for espionage for confirming that the US government was using torture as an interrogation technique, while you continue to refuse to prosecute the torturers themselves?”) are not mentioned. > [@camille](#): > > Instead of that CNN Undecided Voter Graph, I’d like to see the results of candidates being hooked up to a polygraph during the debate. Polygraphs only measure stress, not lies. Publicly defending your opinions on national, live television where people are going to blow any verbal misstep way out of proportion is going to produce a lot of false positives. ---
**Author:** ![camille](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/22d042/32.png) [@camille](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/camille)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2012, 8:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/35 "2012-10-19T08:30:02Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > Polygraphs only measure stress, not lies. Publicly defending your opinions on national, live television where people are going to blow any verbal misstep way out of proportion is going to produce a lot of false positives. True. But it would still be more interesting than that undecided voter graph, and it might inspire them to tone down the bullshit. The shock feature is a keeper, though. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2012, 9:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/36 "2012-10-19T09:30:53Z")
> [@chargerrich](#): > > Two examples of such laughable manipulation: > > Obama claimed that he created 5.2 million jobs in the last 31 months,… > > Romney stated that Obama has doubled the deficit,… I disagree with OP. Of course I disapprove of blatant lies, but when there’s ambiguity it’s only natural to express one’s case in a favorable way. Both of the examples _are quite true_, just misleading. Do you expect a debater to spend part of his two minutes making the opposing case? (Although I don’t think the specific charges are valid, I do agree that exchanging misleading claims will distract viewers from the truth. But the solution, if any, would arise in print media. Televised debates are about style, not information; heaven help a voter who looks to the debates to learn the facts.) ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2012, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/37 "2012-10-19T18:20:10Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > I disagree with OP. Of course I disapprove of blatant lies, but when there’s ambiguity it’s only natural to express one’s case in a favorable way. Both of the examples _are quite true_, just misleading. Do you expect a debater to spend part of his two minutes making the opposing case? > > (Although I don’t think the specific charges are valid, I do agree that exchanging misleading claims will distract viewers from the truth. But the solution, if any, would arise in print media. Televised debates are about style, not information; heaven help a voter who looks to the debates to learn the facts.) And THATs the problem with this sound bite debate format. The Republican primary had about a million hours of debates, the 2008 Democratic debates had a million hours of debate time and I think they were a positive thing. I wouldn’t mind having 3 or 4 more debates a la Lincoln-Douglass. ---
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2012, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/38 "2012-10-20T06:08:29Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > I don’t agree that this is manipulation, unless it has been established that Obama “lost” almost 5.2 million jobs in the first year of his term. Note that that number of jobs being lost in that period of time is not the same thing as Obama losing those jobs. There was an article in that ultra-conservative paper, the Huffington Post, that laid the numbers cited in the OP out on Wednesday morning - according to them there’s only been a netgain of a couple hundred thousand jobs since Obama took office. You can probably find the article pretty easily. They also pointed out that the majority of the jobs lost were mid-wage jobs and the majority created low-wage ones. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2012, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/39 "2012-10-20T07:04:08Z")
> [@panache45](#): > > _“Allow”???_ > > What would you have us do, haul them off to jail if they don’t speak the truth? … I suggest we arm all audience members with crossbows. Perhaps the candidates would pay a bit more attention to actually answering the questions. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2012, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129/40 "2012-10-20T20:25:23Z")
> [@chargerrich](#): > > Obama claimed that he created 5.2 million jobs in the last 31 months, but of course fails to mention that this was only AFTER losing almost that same amount earlier in his term. I don’t really see how this is any more misleading than counting things from the beginning of his term. When he came into office, the economy was hemorrhaging 800,000 jobs per month. Do you think that the President has a magic wand and can instantly stop that? I suppose one could debate when exactly would be a reasonable time to start the accounting, but surely looking only at the “position” but ignoring the “velocity” at the moment he took office is not the correct way to consider things! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/presidential-debate-why-do-americans-allow-this/638129.md?page=3)