Against my better judgment, I watched the presidential debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden. I remembered the disastrous debates between these two in 2020 and wanted to avoid a repeat. CNN did a good job with the format of this debate to prevent the cross-talk experienced in 2020. Dana Bash and Jake Tapper picked good questions and allowed each candidate to say whatever he wanted without rebuttal.
I’m glad I watched.
I will state upfront that I do not like the two candidates that both political parties have selected for this race. Even so, I do prefer one candidate over the other.
Both candidates tended to obfuscate, spin, and avoid the direct questions being asked by the moderators. The moderators did a good job of attempting to gently remind each candidate of the original questions and insist on an answer. Sadly, we didn’t get direct answers to the most important questions.
Fox News has painted Joe Biden as an incompetent president, in cognitive decline, and not truly in charge of the White House.
CNN has painted Donald Trump as a want-to-be dictator who will become a strong-man dictator if he is allowed to enter the White House.
I was shocked to hear the reaction from the CNN news panel after the debate. Without exception, each person on that panel echoed the Fox News talking point that Joe Biden was unelectable.
Frankly, I thought Joe Biden did as good a job as he has with most of his recent public appearances.
The CNN panel members claimed that Joe Biden failed to articulate the Democratic Party's position or rebut Donald Trump’s false claims.
The Fox News coverage was predictable. Donald Trump demonstrated his brilliance, while Joe Biden demonstrated further cognitive decline.
It’s Not About Winning & Losing
I don’t want to focus on who won or lost this debate. Frankly, that’s not important to me. I want to expose an underlying idea that can bring our country down if we don’t deal with it.
This idea is the TRUTH.
Ironically, we have access to more information than ever in the history of our planet. And yet, the truth is elusive. Like many, I don’t have time to fact-check everything a presidential candidate says. I watch CNN and Fox News to get balanced opinions. I then research specific topics I write about by searching the internet and trusting government data collection resources. I then piece together the most honest narrative I can muster.
I tend to grit my teeth when news media personalities are in spin mode. Since they’re always in spin mode... I may need to purchase a mouth guard :) I then try to pick bits and pieces of truth that seem consistent with the data.
Why We Like Debates
We all have egos. The more these egos play a role in our lives, the more likely we are to develop blind spots. If we were fully logical beings, we’d want to uncover those blind spots with TRUTH. However, we are not fully logical beings.
Half of this country has an ego that leans left, while the other half has an ego that leans right. The right overlooks falsehoods uttered by a right-leaning candidate. They classify these falsehoods as typical political spin or harmless comedy. The left classifies falsehoods emerging on the right as lies. The left may advocate for criminal prosecution for such lies. The same game is played on the other side.
This split in egos has created a split in our country between the left and the right. The left has created its version of the truth, while the right has created a completely different version of the truth.
What has been lost in all of this is the TRUTH.
This matters because we face difficult and complex problems that must be solved. Solving problems is hard enough when we know the TRUTH. Solving problems based on the spun truth from the left or right is impossible.
It is tempting to believe that the truth lies halfway between the right’s and the left’s truth. However, in my research, I’ve found that neither side pursues the truth.
We like debates because we believe that a professional speaker will articulate our version of the truth in a way that makes sense and win over the other side… or, at the very least, expose the other side's lies.
Democrats were disappointed in Joe Biden’s performance because they believed he failed to articulate their truth. Republicans were elated with Donald Trump’s performance because he articulated what they believed to be true.
Why We Ought to Like Debates
Many have turned debates into a win/lose event. Since debates are often televised for political campaigns, we see them as a win/lose event. This is NOT the idea of debate at the core of our founding.
Debate is intended to be an intellectual exercise where two opposing viewpoints are presented. Each debater promotes their version of the truth over their opponent’s version. The audience hears both arguments and acts on the most compelling argument. In most cases, this action will consider points made by the debate's loser and dismiss losing arguments by the winner.
In an ego-centric debate, each side rationalizes its argument without considering the other side. The news media exaggerates the weaknesses of the other side and ignores the weaknesses of its own side.
Avoiding Spin - Embracing Logic (Abortion)
I want to take one controversial issue that was brought up last night and show you how an engineer objectively evaluates this information.
The left adheres to “Freedom of Choice,” whereas the right adheres to the “Right to Life.” In 2023, the US Supreme Court overturned a ruling made in 1973 that stated that a state could not make a law banning abortion because it violated the privacy of that woman.
The right believes that a fetus is a human life deserving protection. The left believes that there are many reasons that a woman may decide to abort a fetus that is justified, and the government is the least qualified to weigh in on this decision.
There is not a compromise that will 100% satisfy either side.
I believe the ruling made by the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court was correct. The ruling made in 1973 (Roe vs Wade) lacked a basis in the U.S. Constitution. That said, defining when human life ought to be protected is the issue. Right-leaning states have decided that life starts anywhere between conception and 15 weeks. Left-leaning states have decided that life begins at birth. Some right-leaning states have excluded pregnancies caused by incest and rape in their abortion restrictions.
Logically speaking, it is untenable to imagine that a woman can travel from one state to another and experience such radically different treatment in each state. Imagine a woman who resides in a state that allows abortion up until birth who is traveling to a state that restricts abortion. She plans on having an abortion but has a medical emergency while in another state. She is not allowed to have an abortion even though she chose to live in a liberal state.
I get both sides. Politicians need to stop demagoguing each other and decide when we should define life. This decision cannot vary from state to state. It must be a constitutional amendment.
One more thing… I believe that God is the ultimate arbiter of our moral decisions. Try as we might, our justice system is an attempt to keep the peace in our world. It is not a substitute for ultimate justice.
Now What?
I genuinely don’t care who wins the presidency in 2024. I’ve already shared that I don’t like either candidate.
What we must do is seek the TRUTH.
Politicians spin. The media spins. It is up to you to seek out the TRUTH. This TRUTH must be the basis for political decisions. Having two political parties is difficult but helpful in this endeavor. We need to debate to better understand political topics. If we use debate to expose the TRUTH, we can genuinely solve social problems.
Question your bias. Understand that your ego is pushing you in a direction that may not serve you or everyone else well. Your life experiences are different than others in this country. Strive to help your political leaders make the best decisions for all, even if the results of those decisions may be difficult for you.
If we use debate to demagogue, our struggle to solve these complex problems will continue. If we debate to learn, there is hope.
About the Author
Jeff Schuster is an accomplished businessman, engineer, and writer. Three of Jeff's books are attempts at helping people understand and solve political problems that are being made worse by political partisanship. His first book, Trial & Error, is a collection of 14 short stories. ReEngineering Education is a story of innovative education reform in the midst of political corruption. Engineering Unity is Jeff's most recent book published in August 2023 addressing political polarization on wedge issues that politicians use to divide us. You are welcome to join our private Facebook group called Reengineering Politics where we discuss politically polarizing topics in a civil manner.
Comentarios