Political Spin

Here is an excellent example of political spin, the art of putting a thought into a person's mind to get their thinking aligned with what you want.

This works best if the person has no historical knowledge, no analytical ability, and is gullible, i.e. not able to put things in context and understand manipulation.



Why do I call this spin?

1. The numbers are not adjusted for inflation. So of course the "trip length" and "speed" are quite modest in the early 20th century when a cup of coffee cost a nickle and some people worked for a dollar a day.


2. Why does he insist on talking about a "Democratic Congress" when he talks about Ronald Reagan's presidency? Sure the Democrats enabled the easy spending of Reagan, but the breathtakingly huge budget deficits were Reagan's idea, not the Congress'.


3. Using the "Republican Congress" when talking about Clinton would give you the impression that it was the Republicans who suddenly got religion and "slowed spending". No, Clinton took the tough decision of to cut spending and raise taxes in order to move the budget back toward balance. The Republicans fought him. They wanted bigger military spending and were unhappy about a "peace dividend".


4. He sets up straw man by pretending to be willing to admit the Bush 43 took the "debt car the fastest it had ever gone in history" so that he can then spring on you the drunken wild drive that he wants to pin on Obama. Well, it won't work. First, the biggest debt -- fastest debt car -- was under FDR fighting WWII if you use real constant dollars and not nominal dollars. Second, this careening "debt car" is not Obama's fault. It was the collapsed economy that Bush delivered that required Obama's spending.


5. The cutsy joke about Obama driving backwards and the stressing of Obama's "own budget numbers" he wants you to focus on Obama and forget Bush 43. He doesn't want you to link the wild ride Bush 43 took you on to the still speeding "debt car" that Obama is desperately trying to get control over. Instead he wants to plant the idea that Obama single-handedly has "stepped up" the level of debt. This is nutty. This is like pointing out that before the firemen arrived the flames were only in the back bedroom, but shortly after they arrived the house is fully engulfed, so obviously the firemen have "caused" the house to burn down.

The guy putting out this video is slick. He has crafted an attractive visual and carefully put together a "spin" that will lure the unsuspecting down a path of reasoning which is dead wrong. This is politics as manipulation. There is no high minded attempt here to present facts, make sure all sides are examined, and come to a fair conclusion. This is political "argument" as manipulation and deceit.

There is an honest debate to be had between left and right. There are positive values on both sides. But putting out cartoons that gloss over deep issues and leave misleading impressions is not the way to open up political dialog. This cute bit of work presents itself as "simple fact". The world is not "simple fact". There are many ways to see things. Viewpoints can change as the world changes. It is important to use a political framework to help interpret facts, not a bludgeon to stop debate. If you really want to understand public debt, you need to ask serious questions and not put together razzle-dazzle videos that glide over issues that need to be understood and debated.