Discussion, debate, ...negotiation.
Versus
Bluster, bombast... argument.
Bombastic .... 'high-sounding but with little meaning'. About sums up most of what we hear.
It strikes me when watching politicians, or at times, any public figures, in converstation that there is little in common with the way in which most of us converse.
It is part of the bipartisan way that our politics 'works'. 'I'm right so you must be wrong'. 'I will oppose whatever you have to say as I'm on the opposite side'.....
And the arguments they have are not about finding the right, best or correct way toward a solution for a problem. The objective for all of these arguments is just to win the argument. They're not really concerned about the solution at all. If they were there would be compromise. There is never any compromise. In the real word, where things move forward and progress is made, there is always compromise.
The continuous use of conflicting view points on given sets of statistics, is just desperate. Politicians are always shouting about numbers that might reflect badly on the opposing side while spouting other numbers make them look good. But there are only ever one set of numbers pertaining to any argument, so if they are quoting different sets then they are not arguing about the same issue!
If you have to resort to statistics then your moral argument for your case/solution is too weak. It is highly likely that your case/solution is not the right one.
As any normal person knows to get to a solution you need to; know the goal, disuss the issues, debate the positives and negatives and negotiate a solution.
In its current form politics is not effective. Our current system is holding us all back.