Peculiar Politics: Liar, Liar and Polls on Fire

In the current presidential race, charges of "liar" are being tossed back and forth by just about everyone. Journalistic fact-checkers don't seem to have much impact, probably because people distrust the media more than the politicians (a recent Pew Research Center survey found 65% of the public hold a negative view of the media). My only consolation is that by watching the endless debates and town halls, I will have a chance to hone my skills at detecting liars from a bevy of sources. I revisited lie-detection research I did back in 2014 and added some new input. My first task was to accept that I am pretty bad at deception detection; most of us have only slightly better than a 50-50 chance of spotting a liar. Second, I had to junk popular "tells" as unreliable; the nervous guy who can't make eye contact isn't necessarily a liar; liars can be glib and engage in more eye contact to sell their stories (watch those politicians ace closeups and sound bites). Researchers suggest some slightly more reliable clues to deceit: a slight shrug, usually of one shoulder, coinciding with a verbal statement of confidence is one example, or a slight head shake "no" when saying "yes." Also, beware the smile that does not include the eyes; if the eyes don't simultaneously narrow and produce crow's feet, that flash of white teeth is not an authentic expression of pleasure or good will. And it's been shown that the nose heats up while lying, so watch for a tell-tale Pinocchio nose rub! If I can detect the biggest political liar, I may even get ahead of the pundits in predicting the winner--because in this peculiar election season, there is an inverse relationship between honesty and success. For example, nonpartisan PolitiFact rated the truthfulness of presidential candidates before the Iowa caucuses, and Donald Trump led the pack in falsehoods (78% mostly false statements all the way to pants-on-fire lies), followed by Ted Cruz (68%) and Marco Rubio in third. On the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton were running close, with Bernie at 29% false statements and Hillary at 26% untrue. Now look at the primary results, polls and projections since then. What does it mean? Is there so much anger at the political system that we prefer "authentic" emotions to "establishment" facts? Do we think the world is now a game of liar's poker, and we need to elect the best liar to win? I hope Honest Abe Lincoln and "I cannot tell a lie" George Washington wouldn't run at the bottom of the polls today! For more about political lying: http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/02/01/a-winning-gop-formula-lie-more-do-better/

The Art of the Politically Cunning Tweet

I noticed the other day, thanks to NPR reporting, that Twitter has published a 136-page manual for politicians, "The Twitter Government and Elections Handbook," addressing questions from the basic "Where Do Tweets Appear? Who Reads Them?" to why politicians should be creative with tweets: "In 'stepping out from behind the podium' and showing natural personality, these leaders humanize themselves and the political process — and gain followers to boot." Personally, I don't think 140 characters are conducive to thoughtful political discussion. But there's no arguing Twitter has been a great tool for Donald Trump to keep media buzz constant and display his "natural personality." Those who dismiss his tweets as ego-fueled embarrassments are missing the political strategy in the social media campaign that has kept him top of GOP candidate polls. A recent article by InsideGov.com ranked 30 of Trump's most popular tweets (based on retweets and media attention) by scoring them for arrogance, offensiveness and political cunning. Consider the tweet judged most "Trump-tastic," an April 2015 comment on Baltimore's troubles: "Our great African American President hasn't exactly had a positive impact on the thugs who are so happily and openly destroying Baltimore!" InsideGov rates it strong on all counts: "It's arrogant. Politically, it appeals to Trump's base by belittling Obama and emphasizing crime — a particularly prickly issue among many Trump conservatives. Most of all, however, it maximizes offensiveness, ensuring that the tweet will be reposted, retweeted and criticized around the world." Aristotle's classic analysis of rhetoric posited that effective persuasion is based on ethos (authority of the speaker), logos (logic and facts) and pathos (emotional appeal). Even if facts are given short shrift in Trump tweets, he consistently hits two out of three persuasive power points for followers. Twitter also keeps messages in line with the political virtue of simplicity. To quote Aristotle again: "It is simplicity that makes the uneducated more effective than the educated when addressing popular audiences." For InsideGov analysis of all 30 Trump tweets: http://tucson.com/news/data/ranking-donald-trump-s-best-worst-tweets/article_09035f9a-12d2-5002-92e1-df5379857d2f.html