You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Yosarian2 comments on How big of an impact would cleaner political debates have on society? - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: adamzerner 06 February 2014 12:24AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (85)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Yosarian2 10 February 2014 08:33:11PM 0 points [-]

Interesting.

I view it as a useful way to find out what the currently stated political stance of a candidate is. Once you know that, then if it's an issue you care about, you can take some time and look into the candidate's background and see if his record matches his current political stance. It's also worthwhile to use to keep track of a candidate's positions and see how they change over time based on the next state to have a primary election or from the primary season to the general election season; every politician has some issues he is firm on and some issues on which he is willing to bend on in order to get votes or political support, and it's useful to know which are which.

Comment author: Lumifer 10 February 2014 08:55:43PM 0 points [-]

I view it as a useful way to find out what the currently stated political stance of a candidate is.

It not useful for me. An hour and a half of frantic signaling at the stupider half of the electorate, a popularity contest driven by the necessity to pretend to be the BFF of everyone? I can get a much better idea of a candidate's political stance after spending 10 minutes with Google, compared to cringing and feeling my brain cells atrophy for 90 minutes X-/

Comment author: Yosarian2 10 February 2014 09:27:28PM 0 points [-]

Fair enough. There certainly are plenty of things in those debates that are cringe-worthy.

After the 2012 debates, I half-jokingly suggested that there should be a set of referees at each debate fact-checking each statement made by each candidate, who then blow a whistle and throw a flag when a candidate says something that is just factually untrue. "15 yard penalty- roughing the constitution." ;)