Dishonesty in political advertising

I cannot think of a political ad that I’ve seen, read, or heard this year that didn’t have a degree of dishonesty in it.  I don’t know how people can accept people behind these as leaders and be persuaded by them.  The following example, is one I just heard for the billionth time and it’s ridiculous.

I’m sure we’ve all heard the Obama ads that posit that McCain is a bad choice because he voted with Bush 90% of the time.

Do you see the dishonesty there?

I have no idea if that statistic is true, but let’s say it is.  For it to matter to a potential voter you have to know a couple of things not provided in the advertisement.  Is 90% of Bush’s legislation “bad”?  I have a hard time believing that is true, despite all of the horrible things coming out of the Bush camp.  There are many, many laws passed about mundane, non-consequential things.  Add that to the good things Bush has done, and it surely seems that 90% bad legislation is a stretch.  Does this supposed 90% of the time that McCain voted with Bush align with the bad legislation Bush provided?

It’s all a ploy to get you to vote your emotions.

  1. Dishonesty in political advertising has allways been a part of life and always will be.

  2. True. I think the main point to take away is that for some sad reason political advertising must effective since so much money is spent on it. A large part of the populace seems unable to see past the surface and into the dishonesty.