|
Speak Out
The Path to the Presidency: Why are debates important?
By October, the presidential race is in its home stretch. Election Day is only weeks away, and every move a candidate makes - and everything he or she says - is placed under intense public scrutiny. The situation is magnified in a closely contested race, as we are seeing this year with Senators John McCain and Barack Obama vying for the presidency. An off-color quip or bold statement can potentially swing public opinion one way or another.
This is precisely why debates are so important.
Every four years since the mid-20th century, the major U.S. presidential candidates have faced off in a series of televised debates leading up to the general election. While not an explicit requirement for candidates, debates have been viewed as a way for the public to get to know the candidates and their positions, as well as highlight the differences in their proposed policies. Debates give the candidates a chance to deliver their message on a massive public stage while providing an opportunity for committed and undecided voters to get to know the candidates on an in depth level - both their personalities and their stances on the issues - helping to determine their vote.
The history and process of debates
The idea of public officials trading arguments and counterarguments before the citizens they represent is long-established; in this country, the political debate goes back to the Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858, when Abraham Lincoln challenged Sen. Stephen Douglas to a series of face-to-face, three-hour debates in seven different towns across Illinois. Lincoln and Douglas effectively went out “on tour,” discussing their differing views on slavery and the laws and practices regarding it with the voters they were competing to represent.
The modern debate, however, evolved in the 20th century with the dawn of radio and television. As networks began broadcasting coverage of national campaign speeches and events, voters turned to media besides just newspapers for political information and the message of the candidates reached a broader range of eligible voters from coast to coast.
This opened the door for debate broadcasts. In the late 1940s and early ‘50s, debates between candidates in the primary election were broadcast over the radio. The first televised presidential debates, however, pitted Sen. John F. Kennedy against Vice President Richard Nixon, and many experts suggest that these four appearances on CBS national television helped Kennedy win the 1960 election.
The next presidential debates to be televised nationally took place in 1976 between President Gerald Ford and Georgia Gov. Jimmy Carter. Since then, presidential debates have been televised every election cycle. The 1976 election also featured a debate between Vice Presidential candidates Sen. Walter Mondale and Sen. Bob Dole. The 1980 election had no Vice Presidential debate, but every election since 1984 has.
In most cases, the debates are led by a moderator who poses a predetermined set of questions to the candidates. These questions are grouped together around themes – social policy issues like abortion, or economic issues such as dealing with a recession, or foreign policy issues like the conflict in Iraq. The themes are determined by the Commission on Presidential Debates, a nonprofit group that organizes the debates.
The format of each debate can vary; sometimes it is held in a roundtable setting, sometimes the candidates stand at podiums, facing the crowd. The questions may come entirely from the moderator, or some questions may be taken from the audience in a “town hall” format. In recent years, there have been three presidential debates per cycle, one focusing on foreign policy, one focusing on domestic policy and one on any topic.
Despite the differences in debate styles, formats and themes, however, one constant is the candidates’ desire to put their best foot forward when facing the nation in debate.
How to watch a debate
So far in the 2008 election, we’ve seen debates between presidential candidates Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain and between vice presidential candidates Sen. Joe Biden and Gov. Sarah Palin.
With more remaining in this and future election years, here are some tips to help you get the most out of watching a debate:
- On a sheet of paper, make a list of issues that are important to you, with one column for each candidate.
- As the candidates answer, fill in their views in each candidate’s column.
- If the candidate’s answer makes sense, write “don’t understand.”
- If the candidate does not answer the question, write “didn’t answer.”
- When the debate is over, compare the candidate’s views and see which is best for you.
Read more tips on watching debates at the League of Women Voters’ website.
What can we learn from debates?
When a candidate steps in front of the cameras at a debate, their ultimate goal is to convince the voting public that he or she is the right choice for office At the same time each candidate is trying to point out differences from his or her opponents, suggesting that opposing candidates are the wrong choice for the office.
One of the ways candidates do this is by talking about their “platforms” - stances on major issues they will face once elected to office, issues that are usually of concern to the public. These can include anything from the economy to present military conflicts to health care. Candidates try to highlight their issue positions as they address the specific questions from the moderator, and many times, they will use “sound bites” and prepared answers that they’ve given in speeches on the campaign trail. For the next debate, you can track these “sound bites” and talking points with the National Constitution Center’s Debate Night Bingo scorecard.
Besides issue positions, candidates will discuss their own experience and relate it to their plans for the office. Throughout this process, another thing to listen for in debates is what is commonly referred to as “spin.” Often, when candidates are posed questions or challenged in ways that would work against them, they will carefully phrase their response in a way that makes them more appealing to voters. This may take the form of shifting blame for an unpopular policy away from themselves, leaving out important details or just talking in general, nonspecific terms. Like the word “spin” itself – to ‘twist’ – politicians sometimes use “spin” to twist words so that they are less damaging to themselves or more damaging to their opponents. Check out FactCheckED.org’s tips in a Process for Avoiding Deception.
If you watched the current presidential debates, you saw a few examples of spin. Sen. Obama made the claim that “Over 26 years, Sen. McCain voted 23 times against alternative energy, like solar, and wind, and biodiesel.” This is a misleading; while McCain did vote on at least 23 bills involving alternative energy, 12 of those votes were against bills that would have made alternative energy mandatory. That is not the same as voting to outright oppose alternative energy, which is the effect that Obama’s statement is intended to give; he “spun” the facts, or presented them in a way that made McCain sound opposed entirely to alternative energy.
McCain also used spin when criticizing his opponent; in discussing Obama’s voting record on the war in Iraq, McCain said “Senator Obama, who after promising not to vote to cut off funds for the troops, did the incredible thing of voting to cut off the funds for the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.” This is misleading: Obama’s vote was against a military spending bill that did not include a timetable for troop withdrawal, something the senator described as “open-ended, giving a blank check to George Bush.” Obama instead voted for a troop funding bill that did include a timetable. However, rather than saying that Obama voted against the budget without a withdrawal timetable, McCain simplified the action and said that Obama voted against troop funding altogether, making it seem that his opponent knowingly put troops at risk.
Much of the rhetoric on the campaign trail is “spun” to some degree in effort to highlight candidates’ positions and expose differences between them, however, there are many places that you can – and should – verify the facts of each campaign’s statements. Take a look at FactCheck.org, , where you can find detailed reports analyzing the accuracy of the candidates’ statements posted daily. And on the New York Times Election 2008 debate site, you can watch replays of the presidential and vice presidential debates while reading along with analyses of the candidates’ claims.
What do you think?
Have you watched any of the national debates this year? What did you learn from them? Was your opinion of the candidates influenced by their performance at the debates? Do you plan on watching the upcoming debates? Which issues do you hope to hear the candidates discuss? How do you “check the facts” after hearing what a candidate or campaign says?
|
Join the Discussion
|