this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2025
59 points (92.8% liked)

politics

25645 readers
2586 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://beehaw.org/post/20071879

OK, so that is in the running for clickbait hed of the year, but it's actually apt for the column.

It may seem paradoxical to write this in an opinion piece. But it needs saying: arguments alone have no meaningful effect on people’s beliefs. And the implicit societal acceptance that they do is getting in the way of other, more effective forms of political thinking and doing.

I’m a researcher who studies the intersection of psychology and politics, and my work has increasingly led me to believe that our culture’s understanding of how political persuasion works is wrong. In the age of Donald Trump, Elon Musk and the rise of the far right, commentators have endlessly opined on the problems of fake news, polarisation and more. But they’ve mostly been looking in the wrong places – and have focused too much on words.

Take “debates”. They’re a central part of most election campaigns around the world, seen as so influential that they’re often governed by strict rules around media coverage and balance. Yet evidence suggests that watching debates has no impact on opinions whatsoever. In 2019 researchers analysed 56 TV debates in 22 elections in the US, Canada, New Zealand and Europe from 1952 to 2016. The study tracked nearly 100,000 respondents to see whether debates helped undecided or decided voters to make up or change their minds. They found no evidence that they did. In 2012, a reporter ran another analysis about whether debates influenced election outcomes. As he put it: “The effects of debates on eventual votes are likely mild, and, in most cases, effectively nil.”

all 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I see the point the author is trying to make, but they conveniently left out a major counter example: the last Biden/Trump debate was such a disaster that Biden had to drop out of the race.

[–] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 weeks ago

And supposedly Kennedy beat Nixon because he was a sweaty mess in their debate

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 7 points 3 weeks ago

I've read this kind of thing before and I believe it. People mostly change to conform to their in-group.

The other thing that changes people's minds is trauma. Massive, life altering, trauma.

Like if some maga hat gets the absolute shit kicked out of them by the police they worship, like "will never walk again and is blind in one eye", that might be enough to overload the brain and throw out the 'cops are good, actually ' belief. Might be.

And I think it has to happen to them, not just someone close. There's news stories about like people's husband being deported but they still support trump. I think conservatives particularly are bad at empathy, so they won't get it until something happens to them

[–] PhilLab@feddit.org 3 points 3 weeks ago

Yes, it will!

[–] Eyron@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Their take: they couldn't convince Trump voters, so trying is pointless: maybe we shouldn't even have a debate.

My take: Bad debaters. They've been getting worse over time. What's the best move for a bad debater? Don't debate.

It's easy to look at the data and think that people can't be convinced. Yet, its also easy to look at the Trump debates and see they weren't really trying to convince anyone of much.

You can't convince people if you don't really have a message to convince them of aside from "I'm not Trump" and "Trump is bad." They already believed that: Both candidates were bad, and both candidates are bad at delivering the promises. After three elections with Trump, it's really like a broken record at this point.