> I really wish US politicians would adopt some truth standard in campaigning.

Sounds good. I hereby volunteer to serve as the arbiter of truth for political campaigns.

Well, how do we know that your truth is truer than mine? There has to be a formal certification process. It can be called a “certified truth sayer”, and only those with such a certificate can tell us what’s true and what’s not. And to get certified you need to take a course and pass a test, which are managed and administered by accredited NGOs running on grants from the government and private entities.

I think that would be ridiculous. It’s much better that everyone drown in a sea of noise and dubiousness and disinformation than to ask that we our trust in some central entity that can be manipulated or audited or influenced or held accountable.

What is the US legal system?

Obvious questions for $400

Ding ding ding. Anyone can bring a case to court where multiple third parties can evaluate the claims. And some people lose their case 60+ times and continue to lie as if the evidence was on their side.

During the whole election fraud situation a lot of republicans wouldn't publicly say that the allegations were nonsense although they privately knew that there was no massive fraud. So with truth standard I mean an ethics standard where it's just not OK to lie blatantly. Basically have some integrity.

I’m generally of the view that voters get what they want (even if what they want is internally inconsistent, not in their best interest, or they have to contort their worldview or values to justify it).

My point being, politicians aren’t honest because they’re not penalized by voters for being dishonest.

You reminded me of a documentary I've seen of some former mining town in US where everybody was against Obamacare and liberals, and 30% the county was living on food stamps and could not afford any kind of insurance.

People literally voted against their interests just "to own the libz".

Getting people to vote against their own interests is the central goal for at least 1/2 of all politicians.

I can’t find the study but voters were surveyed regarding their spending priorities as well as their views on balance, budget and deficit spending, and the gist of the study was that most voters wanted more spending, less taxes, and a balanced budget, which is logically inconsistent (but they are getting exactly what they want (even if they complain about it)!

It will absolutely make these types of tactics (seemingly employed by only one party, you know which one) far more personalized and therefore more effective:

https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-technology-arrests-...

https://theintercept.com/2017/11/07/virginia-voters-get-myst...

Not at all. It'll just allow the politicians to blame the lies on the ai

The issue isn't that politicians lie, but that we are numb and don't hold them accountable for it.

Politics are only a reflection of society.

I don't think they are just a reflection. They also shape society.

One could even say... they have a dialectical relationship

Seeing them qualify their statements with "I will renounce my position in office and consider myself a disgrace to my party if I do not fulfill ____". They could still reneg, but it's putting up some collateral. Remember how much bad PR Bush I got for "read my lips" ?