Things Politicians Do in Debates That You Should Avoid When Writing

The first debate between Barack Obama and John McCain was supposed to center around some questions about economic and foreign policy. Unfortunately, I often had a hard time remembering what the questions were because they simply weren’t being answered. This is business as usual in politics, but it has no place in writing. (More interested in politics than writing? Here’s why I voted for Obama.)

Here is a list of every single question each candidate was asked to answer:

• Where do you stand on the bailout?
• How do your economic plans as president differ?
• What will you have to delay or give-up in terms of spending due to current economic issues?
• What are the lessons of Iraq?
• Should we have United States troops in Afghanistan? How many? When?
• What is the threat from Iran?
• What is Russia to the U.S.?
• What is the likelihood of another 9/11?

These questions would be a good foundation for a short paper. Your thesis statement for a paper including these questions would relate to your current sentiments and intentions as president. Thereafter, you would begin each paragraph with the main idea for each question.

In this debate, both candidates break a cardinal rule of communication: they state or acknowledge a main idea, only to talk about something else. I have to give them credit for sometimes vaguely dancing around the thesis, but for specific topics you have to be more precise.

Here is an example based on essentially what each candidate said concerning the lessons to be learned from Iraq:

Obama

There are many lessons to be learned from Iraq. We should not have invaded. It was too expensive. We should’ve been in Afghanistan first. There have been 34,000 casualties. Al-Qaeda is stronger than ever. We need to use the military more wisely. We need to have a timetable for our exit strategy. McCain supported the Iraq War; that was bad.

McCain

There are many lessons to be learned from Iraq. You can’t have a failed strategy. I fought to have a good strategy – the surge. Our general is great and we will come home victorious. We have reduced violence. Obama cut off funds for the troops. We can’t do a timetable, because leaving early would just make things worse.

You can’t get much more vague than this. When discussing a topic you have to support your main idea.

Here is a better way to approach these topics:

Obama or McCain

We’ve learned several lessons from Iraq. We’ve learned that spreading democracy is something that an Islamic nation will not easily embrace. Church and state are not separate in Iraq, and we should’ve considered that. We are now more aware than ever of the need to have accurate, reliable military intelligence. Finally, we’ve learned that invading a sovereign nation has expansive, often unforeseen repercussions.

I’m not saying this paragraph is perfect, but at least all my information corresponds with the question of “lessons learned from Iraq.” Whether or not this paragraph would work for either candidate is irrelevant. The point is this: when you write, you have to get rid of the fluff and answer the damn question.