This article is from the archive of our partner .

Ramesh Ponnuru in Bloomberg View on how we talk about drones Neither side wants to look soft on terrorists, so both support drone strikes. "The lack of debate about our reliance on drones is a shame, because there are both practical and moral objections to it." Should we be killing less and capturing more? Is it increasing anti-Americanism? Are too many civilians dying? There hasn't bene a proper public debate, making it hard to believe we're getting it right.

Michael Gerson in The Washington Post on the trouble with math in politics The problem with the focus on Nate Silver's predictions is that makes the political discussion trivial. "An election is not a mathematical equation; it is a nation making a decision. People are weighing the priorities of their society and the quality of their leaders." The more we talk about math, the less we talk about poverty, social mobility, or unsustainable debt. "It is a sad and sterile emptiness at the heart of a noble enterprise."

Kevin M. Kruse in The New York Times on truth losing out "While the line between fact and fiction in politics has always been fuzzy, a confluence of factors has strained our civic discourse, if it can still be called that, to the breaking point." A postwar economic boom encouraged deference for institutions like government and journalists. Candidates believed a lie could damage their career. Now, the truth is no longer just stretched; it's ignored.

Randy E. Barnett in The Wall Street Journal on the mistake of the Libertarian Party Libertarians having a third party drains votes from the bigger, coalition Republican party, and thus further removes libertarians from accomplishing their goals. "By drawing libertarian politicos from both major parties, the LP makes these parties less libertarian at the margin than they would otherwise be. In each major-party coalition, the libertarian element is weaker precisely to the extent that libertarian politicos are expending their energies on behalf of the LP."

Sasha Issenberg in Los Angeles Times on why we vote The vast majority of people voting go to the polls even though they know it will have little bearing on who actually makes it to the White House due to the electoral college system. People tend to vote more when voting signals a sense of belonging or when media suggests a certain type of person votes. It's less about candidates anre more about "how we want to see ourselves, and want others to see us."

This article is from the archive of our partner The Wire.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to