Why has politics in America become full of personal attacks, and not debate on policy differences?

Answer 1

With candidates, it's an easy way to cover up the truth.

When a candidate is questioned on why they support taking jobs from the USA by supporting NAFTA, CAFTA, NAU, etc., they quickly laugh and then call the Patriotic candidates crazy or belittle them in some way.

People who are personally attacking others instead of debating the real issues are nothing more than bullies who like to push others around to get their own way regardless of who it hurts.

Wouldn't you love to see a real debate on the real issues that matter to the USA citizens that included all candidates running for office at the debates - not just Democrats and Republicans? What about the Liberals, Independents, etc.?

What about those running for Senate and House positions? These are the lawmakers who are taking away the rights of the USA citizens with such things as the Dream Act which is paid for with income tax from those who pay income tax. Illegals cannot pay income tax because they are undocumented.

It might be nice to get written responses to all of the issues from every candidate so we can make an intelligent choice instead of just hearing what the media is spoon feeding us.

Answer 2

well--this could take a book to answer. Will start off by saying people love to hear personal matters , they strive on gossip and things that really dont mean much. Then when someone is slinging mud at someone else the attention is focused away from them onto the person they are talking about.
Another thing is that the law doest apply to all equally. I can never figure out why a Judge-or strong politician doesnt get the same sentence as average Joe. Seems they have a little advantage. For example why should a Judge or Politician still receive his pension when Joe Blow would lose his for almost the same crime??? This has always confused me and I am sure others as well.
I could go on and on but you get the idea.

Answer 3

Welcome to the world of the far left. They are irrational people and unfortunately cannot be compromised with because they seek all or nothing. Dealing with people like this unfortunately means the debate will get ugly. They attack people rather than debate issues because their positions on the issues do not sell with the American people. Their only hope is smearing the opposition in a win at all cost war. It is sad that people look at politics that way but it is the world we now live in- unfortunately. Liberals and conservatives used to be able to compromise because for the most part these entities are rational even though quite different. The far left which has grown to a sizeable number is not rational. (the far right is so small it is insignificant)

Answer 4

Because all politicians lie, cheat, steal and with that in common the only thing they have left is personal attacks. They don't want to jeopardize their own lifestyles, so they don't bring up the fact that the other person is a liar, cause they are too. Can't call them a cheat, cause they are too. Can't accuse them of stealing anything, cause they steal from each other and the public too. What else is left? Personal attacks.

Answer 5

Yes, discussion has broken down to partisan name calling, but you have to consider the source, which actually is a partisan situation.

It began when Bush took office. The GOP controlled the White House and Congress. This has happened before, but what was unprecedented was Karl Rove's vision of creating not just a Republican government but a permanent GOP majority. For the first six years of Bush's presidency, every move was politicized and positioned for the GOP to build more and more power, from jerrymandering districts to changing to non-accountable electronic balloting to appointing inadaqate people to governmental positions that were loyal to the president instead of the laws of the constitution.

For 6 years, the GOP did whatever Bush wanted and the Dems. could not stop them. It got to the point where the GOP would just walk out of Congress when a Democrat speaker debated an issue; they didn't care what the Dems. said since they can do what they want.

After they lost the Congress and their ability to just bully their ideologiy into law, they attacked the patriotism of Democrats. So now you just have blindly loyal neocons parroting the soudbites they hear on FOX, calling liberals communists and terrorist lovers (they pick whatever they think can conjure up the greatest fear in Americans) in an effort to get their GOP empire back. Liberals have grown weary and frustrated by it, and have stooped to partisan name calling as well.

Republicans have had it their way for so long that they are still unwilling to listen, but they have no choice since they no longer have the majority. But they still have the President's veto pen, so now neither party can get what they want.

Answer 6

hahaha that is humorous from the man who spends all day spreading piles and lumps of lies approximately liberals and particular democrats. In your brain I wager phrases like libtard, accusations of traitor, communist, terrorist, all of the quite a bit and numerous proper wing propaganda Republicans take as gospel - don't seem to be individual assaults. Well wager what - the vast majority of Americans do. And that's why irrespective of how a lot company sponsorship - the proper wingers will constantly survive the perimeter.

Answer 7

Ideology trumps Truth in today's world more times than not. If you can't win an argument based on truth, then your only choice is to concede or make personal attacks against the opponents character.

Answer 8

If the debate centered on policy differences, then we might be able to reach a compromise everyone can be fairly happy with.

Now who wants THAT?

Answer 9

A similar phenomenon is also happening in most European States. I personally think it is due to a deep but hopefully still reversible crisis in our democratic systems. On the one hand, most voters either vote always for the same party independently of specific political programmes or just never vote. On the other hand, those voters who vote in conscience - i.e. with regards to specific ideological beliefs and political programmes- do not find them any lon ger in any party or election. It is, in my humble opinion, a matter of ethics and politcs. Please visit our web sites:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ethicsandpolitics
and:
*

Thank You

Answer 10

With policy differences you have to back your point up but with personal attacks all you have to do is call names. It's too easy.