Also making wild statements is Ben Carson, despite his mild-mannered demeanor. Instead of strongly admonishing Trump on his vaccine zinger, Dr. Carson exaggerated this false narrative by alleging that pediatricians have reduced the number and proximity of vaccines (untrue according to the American Academy of Pediatrics). Incredibly, the other doctor-as-candidate, Rand Paul, essentially doubled down on Carson’s point, leaving Trump’s statement hanging out there without rebuke.
Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have played fast and loose with facts, too. Sanders recently stated that America spends almost twice as much per capita on health care as any other country (we spend more, but not that much more). Clinton has stated that the Benghazi probe is the longest-running congressional investigation ever (several examples of much longer ones exist).
How do candidates get away with this, while some, like Trump and Fiorina, apparently gain even more support in the wake of their falsehoods? A key explanation is that facts create cognitive dissonance for voters. It’s much harder for voters in each party to believe their own candidates might be lying to them than it is to continue believing a lie or half-truth. Psychologists refer to this tendency to believe a lie about a group or person one dislikes as confirmation bias. Hence, politicians have a powerful incentive to continue lying in order to keep their supporters energized.
In their recent book “Do Facts Matter?,” Jennifer Hochschild and Katherine Einstein discuss how confirmation bias has contributed to the emergence of “engaged misinformed” voters who represent a threat to democratic governance. While we all are susceptible, these authors demonstrate that extreme partisans are more likely to succumb to confirmation bias, and are much less likely to change their minds when confronted with the facts. Since strong partisans are more active in party nominating processes, it’s no surprise that when Carson and Paul had the chance to use their expert authority as physicians to correct Trump on his vaccine statement, they hesitated — as if thinking about telling the truth — and then demurred. They knew their audience.
When facts aren’t agreed to at the outset, addressing our shared challenges is almost impossible, and gridlock ensues. Shaming politicians who are ignorant of or loose with the truth, fact-checking them and appealing to professional expertise are all effective ways to move forward, but as citizens we each must be open to the fact of confirmation bias and push against it in our own behavior. Our democracy depends on it.
About the Author