As the time to cast a ballot approaches, it is important to stay in tune with the current state of the two presidential candidates, Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Trump. This includes their advertisements, rallies, public statements, and news coverage from their respective parties. However, the recent presidential debates stand out as particularly contentious and controversial. More specifically, they are not the source of policy and cordial conversation that they used to be ten years ago. Rather, current debates seem to lean more towards a recurring pattern of political impasse spearheaded by our country’s tense polarization. So, one must ask: What are debates even good for anymore, and what do they say about the current state of our country?
Harris v Trump, 2024
This past September, Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump gathered at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia to face off in a historical debate. Going in, the energy surrounding this event clearly contrasted with the fallout from June’s debate between President Joe Biden and Mr. Trump which led to Mr. Biden dropping out of the race only a month later.
September’s debate stirred controversy, with many of the debate’s moments being marked by outlandish claims, uncordial exchanges, and pointless meanderings. While intensity was expected from both candidates, this debate unveiled a new level of partisanship and dangerous misinformation. Many credit Mr. Trump’s false claims throughout the 90 minutes as the primary culprit behind the debate’s infamy, such as his claim that in Springfield, Ohio, the Haitian immigrant community is “eating the pets of the people that live there.” Mr. Trump also seemed to avoid many of the questions asked, with a notable moment being his response to a question about abortion. Moderator and broadcaster Linsy Davis asked the question, saying, “Vice President Harris says that women shouldn’t trust you on the issue of abortion because you’ve changed your position so many times. Therefore, why should they trust you?” Mr. Trump then disregarded the immediate question and instead accused Ms. Harris of promoting abortion in the ninth month in which they “execute the baby.” These claims of “ninth-month abortions” and instances of “abortion after birth” are false claims, with a CDC study stating only 0.9 percent of abortions occur at or after 21 weeks gestation for non-genetic reasons. Despite this, he touted his claims and did not revoke any of his falsifications.
Ms. Harris did not express such false claims, though she was not exempt from promoting partisanship. Most notably, many of her responses seemed to be based on defending herself against Mr. Trump’s accusations or criticizing him repeatedly. Moreover, every answer that she provided also included a reference, criticism, or correction of Mr. Trump.
The First Televised Debate – Nixon v Kennedy, 1960
Despite presidential debates being a traditional practice previous to television, the first televised and widely seen debate was between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon in 1960. Garnering over 65 million viewers, this debate offered voters a new way to engage with candidates outside of their individual campaigns and adverts. Interestingly, the introduction of television into the November race brought a new aspect to Nixon’s and Kennedy’s campaigns: appearance. More specifically, the ways people viewed each candidate depend on their actual physical appearance, with the division between radio listeners and TV watchers becoming clear.
In a 2003 study by political scientist James N. Druckman, a group of 171 students with no prior knowledge of the Kennedy-Nixon debates were split into two groups: one group listened to the debate, and the other watched the debate. Druckman found that TV viewers “learned more about policy but judged the winner almost solely on their personalities” while listeners “judged the winner based on both issues and personality.” Clearly, this debate marked a point at which a political campaign became for the goal of entertainment and crafting a public image through televised media just as much as for policy.
However, there was still a clear, bipartisan focus on current issues and policy within Nixon and Kennedy’s conversation. With a brief opening screen and then a cut to Kennedy sitting on the left, the moderator in the middle, and Nixon on the right, the moderator prefaced the debate by saying, “We are proud to provide a discussion of issues in the current political campaign by the two, major candidates for the president.” As the debate continued, both candidates expressed their outward respect for each other and their unified goal of moving America toward a better future, with Kennedy staring into the camera as to speak directly to the American public, stating, “I think Mr. Nixon is an effective leader of his party. The question before us is which point of view and which party do we want to lead the United States?” Mr. Nixon added to Kennedy’s focus on America as a whole, saying, “Our disagreement is not about the goals for America. But only about the means to meet those goals.”
Romney v Obama, 2012
Five decades and thirteen elections later, another notable debate arose between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney on October 3, 2012. The program opens with an eager audience as both candidates approach each other and jovially shake hands, even throwing in a pat on the back and a laugh. Obama then goes on to happily express that it was his wedding anniversary, at which Romney politely joins in, saying, “And congratulations to you, Mr. President, on your anniversary. I’m sure this was the most romantic place you could imagine: here with me! So, I wish you congratulations”. They then went into specific, civil conversations regarding their takes on policy without the intrusion of their own agendas as candidates.
What Does This Mean Now?
Clearly, there has been a shift from the cordial attitudes of the 1960s and the 2010s that were established as the standard for debates. As the now tense, confrontational approach between candidates becomes the new norm, the state of America is clear. The further the country has evolved into a partisan state, the more debates and campaigns themselves have become less about the actual politics. Now, it seems that unbiased policies and issues have morphed into catapulted ideas that are all about self-promotion. Not the well-being of Americans. Not the betterment of the future. Rather, the most effective way to garner votes and attention has relied on the exaltation of the person themselves. Whether it be through promoting blatant falsehoods to stir controversy or encouraging hatred between groups, there is no need to appeal to both sides anymore. There’s only a need for one’s persona and one’s party to be stronger than the other.
Things to Consider as You Engage with Politics
Amidst the tumultuous political climate in this country, it is vital to remain up to date with politics, even with the debates. Despite their extreme nature, debates still provide an insightful look into the intentions of each candidate and their reactions to those who disagree with them. So, while they may not be a source of direct policy or efficient dissension, they are still important to pay attention to. Additionally, in a time of artificial intelligence and misinformation across the internet that can sway the views of voters this election, it is important to abide by three basic principles:
- Ensure that your information about candidates, political events, and major issues is based in fact, not on opinions or ideas from a politically affiliated group.
- Vote. It is a direct way to input your voice into the upcoming election and a vital way to sustain democracy.
- Avoid complete partisanship and seek out environments with diverse political opinions.
Indresh Chandel