I respectfully disagree. There are better ways for the public to hear from presidential candidates, and less corrupt forums for undecided and swing voters to engage with candidates.
The truth is that in this era of polarization, most voters are deciding who to vote for.
“Debates don't have a huge impact on voters' decisions,” Dean Lacey, a government professor and director of the political law program at Dartmouth College, said in an interview. .
Lacey said it's also unclear whether the televised debates, which are watched by tens of millions of viewers, will function as voting events. “There's not a lot of good evidence…I'm concerned that even if there was evidence that presidential debates increase voter motivation based on prior debates. And this year's If the debate turns into a circus, voters may turn away.”
Lacey succeeded with flying colors. There was a time when the presidential debates, which have been going on for about 60 years, were treated as a legitimate platform for candidates to discuss their policy positions. The first time I followed his presidential campaign in Boston as a journalist was in 2008. I remember watching the last presidential Democratic primary debate between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton 16 years ago. Compared to the debate held between incumbent candidates in September 2020, President Trump interrupted Biden's remarks and challenged him by asking, “Will you shut up?” and called it “the worst presidential debate in American history.” I was called. — Obama and Clinton's skill, expertise, and substance were extraordinary.
Debate is an art and requires a tremendous amount of preparation, critical thinking, and performance talent. These are clearly not qualities associated with Trump. Except for that last point, if by “acting ability” you mean what's displayed in WWE cage matches and reality TV.
Perhaps that's why Trump has publicly encouraged a debate with Biden. The former president's campaign wants more and earlier debates, but Biden is not keen. Why give Trump a platform to be mean and spew misinformation and conspiracy theories to a presumably large audience? Why should Biden agree to that?
On the other hand, there are risks if the president avoids discussing Trump. “Biden needs to prove that he does not have underlying cognitive decline and is capable of a presidential debate,” Lacy said.
Aside from President Trump, and given the commercial nature of televised events like presidential debates, who might emerge victorious if the debate were to take place, aside from the television networks? “It's clear that third-party candidates like John Anderson and Ross Perot would benefit from appearing on stage with major-party candidates and appearing legitimate. ” Lacey told me.If independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had made it that far…now? that It will be a spectacle. Still, enough is enough.
Stop watching presidential debates on TV. In these polarized times, forums have become painfully anachronistic. Of course, I understand that tradition is important in presidential politics. As Lacey said, debates have become something voters expect, so not being able to “live up to the expectations of participating” in a debate can hurt a candidate.
At the very least, television networks should change the format to make the discussion more approachable and less offensive. For example, if a candidate doesn't meet the time limit, organizers should “put an automatic timer on the microphone,” Lacey said. And moderators need to improve by asking pointed questions about policy.
Undecided voters have ample opportunity to be informed about Biden and Trump, and the opportunity isn't touted as a “showdown” or “must-see TV.” Please remove me from the presidential debate observer group, even if the format changes.
Marcela Garcia is a Globe Theater columnist. Contact her at marcela.garcia@globe.com.follow her @Marcella_Elisa and Instagram @marcela_elisa.
