Why do people try to change subject during political debates?

Question

It stops debate and has nothing to do with the topic. It's a failure of logic so, why do it?

Answer 1

Changing the subject has the effect of putting your opponent off balance while you are on secure footing. While that may make one feel he is "winning the debate," in fact it is avoiding the debate.

In finances, there is a theory that says "put off paying as long as possible." Maybe the "changing of the subject" is similar. The payment would be facing the world with a legitimate answer to a legitimate question. If we can put off that moment, we buy time to either construct an answer or hope the questioner loses interest.

We reduce legitimate questions to Us vs Them shouting matches for a variety of reasons:
1. Hitting talking points is easier than having thoughtful debate. If the debate isn't covered in the talking points, my goal might become to change the subject.
2. Hitting talking points reinforces that one is part of the group that also hits the same talking points. That gives the speaker confidence in the "group think" that he might not have in his own ability to think through the answer, so he changes the subject to the talking points.
3. Making a joke instead of answering a question gets an immediate positive response, like a chuckle at the wit, and at least temporarily relieves the pressure of answering. That chuckle feels good, and reinforces itself. Besides, there is perverse entertainment in belittling others.
4. Changing the subject is allowed. Rarely is political "debate" so well moderated that the moderator keeps the debate on topic effectively. Especially in the "debate" in the press, no one is making us toe any reasonable or ethical line, so people do what they can.
5. Finally, in my opinion, we as American LISTEN to the change of topic, forget the original question, laugh at the jokes, and take part in the name calling, so we reward those who don't make us think too hard or stretch too far.

Answer 2

Good question. Changing the subject during a political debate is a political tactic. This usually happens when the debater is caught in a lie or is proven wrong. So, instead of answering the direct question, the debater who is being questioned, tries to take the focus off them by changing the subject. At times it works in their favor, but it often shows that the person doesn't understand the ideal of debating.
I personally find it irritating. For example, if I ask a question that is direct towards Republicans, Republicans will reply with an irreverent answer or transform my question onto something about Democrats. This behavior clearly demonstrates that not only are they incapable of debating, they can't admit their flaws and/or put the focus on themselves. (Note: this is only an example)

Answer 3

Politicians go into debates with rehearsed answers that they and thier handlers have carefully crafted to get thier message across, make them look good, and get the emotional responses they hope will motivate the dumber 51% of the population to vote for them.

They will not let minor technicalities - like no one ever asking them the right question - get in the way of reciting these masterpieces of glittering rhetoric. Thus, as soon as they get a question that they can possibly twist to one of thier pre-packaged topics, they go for it.

Answer 4

It's just good old human nature. People will always try to change a subject, to try and go for there strong points. Problem is many people are to stupid to notice when the favorite politicians do it.

Answer 5

I don't know but Biden was high or drunk or maybe happy because he received a BJ before the debate from a dirty hooker!

Answer 6

Because 90% of voters are idiots and these politicians know that tap dancing and using key words will satisfy them. Check out the Bush admins speaches about anything, they say terrorism 100's of times to get it to stick in your head, even when it is not relevant.

Terrorism! Terrorism! Terrorism! Terrorism! Terrorism!

Now what are your thinking? Terrorism? Like getting a song stuck in your head.

Answer 7

its called CYA - when done well it appears a candidate answers a question but in reality the candidate has done nothing to state what they will do but appear they have actually intelligently answered the question -bill clinton and ron reagan were the best I have ever seen doing this -kerry spoke to slowly to get away with it

Answer 8

People tend to think that if you don't agree with them that there is nothing to debate.

/look a puppy

Answer 9

Well, many of them have prepared several points that they will try to make throughout the debate.....when it doesn't fit in or no one brings up their issue, they have to stick it in somewhere.....but, yes, it does get a bit annoying......almost like they are plugging an ad for something..

Answer 10

Because politics and religion always stir up disagreement and arguments, because both sides are so stubborn and will never budge from their views even if they know the other person is making sense.
Keef