Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
It’s always kind of funny that political debates have basically become these weird theatrical things where the majority of people have zero interest in what’s being said and base their entire judgements on how it’s said.
Someone can spend the entire time doing nothing but lying, presenting objectively terrible ideas, and dodging every question, but as long as they seem composed and well spoken, they can still “win” against someone who puts the truth and smart policy first if they stumble on a few words. It’s crazy.
And then you’re supposed to put together some well-written response to someone who says “Can’t vote for her, didn’t like the way she talked!” which is impossibly dumb as it is, but you’re the ####### for not treating it like it’s valid lol
|
Debates are nothing but political theatre at this point. Talking points regurgitated to its base to enforce their own team. There is no push back, no fact checking, no rules. They are practically useless.
I think the idea of demeanor and composure being the main focus largely comes from the Nixon/Kennedy debate; which many pundits though had an adverse impact on Nixon's campaign (among television viewers; many radio viewers felt Nixon performed better - i wonder if this was an age thing though?). I think many pundits put more weight on debates as a result of this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_U...al%20election.