Politics brings out the best in some people and the worst in some others. Wait…strike out the first part.

While I person­ally don’t care too much about the US elections, there are times when a little atten­tion cannot be avoided. For instance, when you idly open the Digg homepage and notice that half the stories are about Presi­den­tial candi­dates, you can’t help but start reading some of them.

My first obser­va­tion is this: every news site or forum discussing the election belongs to exactly one of the two camps. A forum that belongs to camp ‘A’ will post wonderful stories about candi­date ‘A’ and try its best in subtle and not-so-subtle ways to mock, deride and expose the mendacity of the other camp. This should not come as a surprise to anyone.

And here’s my next obser­va­tion: a supporter of candi­date ‘A’ will inevitably drift towards a forum that supports his candi­date. There, he will praise his idol and curse the opponent, and he will nod and murmur in agree­ment when others do the same. What is inter­esting is that not many of these people venture into the enemy camp to contra­dict their opponents lies, or clarify their own position. Why? Maybe because they know that few would be willing to change their opinions when provided with better infor­ma­tion — and so they sit with their mates and bask in the warm, fuzzy feeling they get when everyone agrees with them.

What is the point of an election in which a majority of the people stubbornly cling to their opinions without weighing the facts and coming to a conclu­sion ratio­nally? Perhaps the best solution would be to disen­fran­chise everyone having a fixed opinion, and ask the rest to vote.…