The primary election is over in Wyoming. By all accounts, tons of out of state money was dumped into the state trying to tell Wyoming voters how to vote. Political candidates from almost every point of view faced dirty mailers, deceptive door-to-door tactics, distasteful text messages and tons of social media designed to guide the Wyoming voters selection.
Since the primary election is over, we should evaluate the political deflection techniques used by candidates in the heat of the election. A deflection technique is a way to redirect attention away from the real topic. Rather than addressing an unpleasant reality, the deflector will shift attention to something else. By using deflection techniques, a candidate can talk about what the candidate wants to talk about, not about an uncomfortable issue.
The first deflection technique is “Well, what about . . . ?” The technique distracts from a negative issue by pointing out, usually through a false equivalency, some perceived hypocrisy of the other candidate. A common example that is popular this week is “Donald Trump is a convicted felon.” The deflection statement is, “Yeah, but what about Hunter Biden’s laptop?” By deflecting the issue to Hunter Biden, the discussion of the merits of the convictions is deflected.
Another deflection technique is shifting blame. Let me preface this example by saying there is no excuse for threatening an elected official. Threats of violence are wrong in every respect. Recently, Secretary of State Chuck Gray was threatened in a voicemail. Much speculation about the source of the email circulated after the email’s publication.
Secretary Gray blamed the “liberal media” for causing the threats. In an email to the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, Secretary Gray said, “This is how the radical left, the media and insiders now operate. The false reports from the media have also included false claims that somehow, I’m deputized with being the arbiter of truth in election mailers, which is a false media claim counter to the Constitution and the Election Code.”
Secretary Gray deflected the blame for the voicemail from the perpetrator of the crime to the “liberal media.” The only person responsible for the voicemail was the person who made the call. By deflecting the criticism to the media, Secretary Gray tried to gain some political advantage from the terrible call.
Another deflection technique is simply changing the subject. When President Biden was confronted with the disastrous withdrawal and abandonment of Afghanistan, he simply spoke about how much he respects the American soldier and blamed his predecessors. The discussion changes from how poorly the withdrawal was handled to how great the soldier is, and whether we should have been in Afghanistan in the first place. It is a shameful dodge of a shameful act.
Another example of deflection techniques is demonization. In a recent guest column by Senator Sheri Steinmetz in Cowboy State Daily, she criticized Gov. Gordon for a series of policy decisions including his handling of the “China Virus,” CO2 policy and removing Dr. Cubin from the Wyoming Board of Medicine.
Then, out of the blue, she said, “Make no mistake, Mark Gordon is selling Wyoming to his elitist friends and the highest bidder. This election cycle, Wyoming must reject Mark Gordon and the Liz Cheney Republicans supporting him.”
A factual argument jumps from a policy discussion to a demonization fantasy. Sen. Steinmetz invokes the magical words of political incantation to tie Gov. Gordon with elitists and the political pariah du jour, Liz Cheney.
Politicians try to tie their opponents to unfavorable subjects or characters. In the last election cycle, we saw attempts to tie opponents to child molesters, Nazis, gun grabbers or habitual drunkards. These transparent attempts to link opponents to deflect the discussion from the merits of policy to whether or not the opponent is a bad person.
Deflection techniques do nothing to advance positive discussion. They are short-term techniques for politicians to avoid discussing topics which are uncomfortable to address or gain political advantage. Over time, deflection techniques breed resentment, frustration and confusion. No wonder people don’t want to have anything to do with politicians.
We should understand these deflection tools, and steer the conversation back to the original issue. We need to understand the substance of our politician’s positions, not their ability to dodge the issues.
Instead of dodging issues, we should try to understand each other’s perspectives, have adult discussions and finally resolve issues. Until we can get to the meat of the real subjects of the day, we will get platitudes, deflection and policy devoid of analysis.
We need to demand intelligent debate about the issues of the day, not sidestepping and political dodges. If we don’t, we get what we deserve.
Tom Lubnau served in the Wyoming Legislature from 2005 - 2015 and is a former Speaker of the House.
He can be reached at: YourInputAppreciated@gmail.com
