2 ms·
I always felt they should do something like this for politicians during a race. No names, age, gender, political leanings, etc. Just interviews and debate.
by rottyguy 10y ago
I always felt they should do something like this for politicians during a race. No names, age, gender, political leanings, etc. Just interviews and debate.
- alphapapa 10y agoNot sure exactly what you mean. But some kind of anonymous/pseudonymous debate or interview process would not be a good idea, even though it would have some nice benefits in theory. For example, it would be easy for a malicious candidate to profess views opposite to what he believes in order to be elected. Then he could pursue his actual policies after taking office. Oh, wait, this happens now... :( But it would be even easier without true identity and non-verbal cues, etc. Words on a screen/page could be written by anyone. Real identity is crucial, because what matters more than words is actions, and only with a real name, face, and history can past actions be examined to determine whether the person lives up to their rhetoric. If political history teaches us anything, it should teach us to pay less attention to what politicians say and more attention to what they have done. So, as interesting as debates can be, maybe we need less of those and more examination of candidates' past. If we really want to know what a candidate believes and what he will do if elected, we should look at what he's done in the past.