Biden and Trump campaigns agree to hold two presidential debates Earlier this month, who among us could contain our excitement?
Well, it depends on what you mean by “we.” In my own pundit world – pundits, commentators and political geeks – there was great jubilation, and watching the programmes on Sunday, you'd be forgiven for thinking that church bells must have been ringing across the country to celebrate the news as if a medieval queen had given birth to a boy. The debate is on! The debate is on! Hooray!
Meanwhile, among normal people, the sound you didn't hear was a majority shrug of the shoulders, while a smaller portion of the population would have let out the kind of groan you might make when you realize you're sitting in the middle seat on an airplane.
I have no polls to back this up, but I suspect that most Americans view the prospect of Donald Trump and Joe Biden exchanging shouting matches like a pair of tired, resigned old men arguing over the bill at Denny's. Oh really? Are you doing this again?
Now we understand why journalists and geeks are excited. For one, presidential debates inflate journalists' egos and give them ample opportunity to pontificate about the important role of the fourth estate in a democracy. They also have a positive impact on ratings: the first debate of 2020 was abysmal, yet 73 million people tuned in.
Support local journalism
The drama of politicians giving unscripted (though often rehearsed) answers to complex questions has a Super Bowl feel for political nerds. Listening to either of the current front-runners is like watching a race car driver get behind the wheel of a car with no brakes, only more exciting. There's always a certain dark allure to the prospect of a spectacular clash, and in a Trump-Biden matchup, a clash is a certainty.
What's being forgotten in all the furore over the latest debate agreement is the fact that almost all presidential debates are boring, unproductive spectacles.
Debate talk is often somewhat tautological. People say that because we've had presidential debates before, we need more. But that's not true.
The first presidential debate between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon took place in 1960 (when Biden and Trump were 17 and 14 years old, respectively). The only debate anyone remembers about Kennedy and Nixon is the first one, which, according to legend, Nixon lost.Nixon was not a good candidate for the debate because he was wearing no makeup, unshaven, and sweating. Legend has it that people who heard the debate on radio thought Nixon had won, but people who watched it on television were so impressed by Kennedy's sleek style and good looks that they thought he had won. Nixon, who was thin and tired at his first debate, rested, put on lots of makeup, and won the next two debates.No one remembers.
In other words, the lesson from the beginning has been that style is more important than content, and always has been.
We've been told time and time again that TV debates convey important information to voters, so we think so. But TV, often subconsciously, makes some information seem more important than it actually is. For example, in most presidential elections, the taller candidate wins.Does height have any correlation with good policy?
There's a reason why Franklin D. Roosevelt kept his wheelchair hidden from view, but the list of practical criticisms of him is endless, and his history with polio isn't one of them.
Of course, television appearances are part of the job description of a modern president. But televised presidential debates elevate the qualifications beyond all measure. Yes, yes, a president needs to be a good communicator. But the actual presidency never requires a president to spar with a political opponent for 90 minutes in front of millions of people.
The political skills we test are not the political skills required for the job. Candidates who lie forcefully, confidently, or entertainingly tend to thrive in debates, while candidates who tell the truth awkwardly, tentatively, or with moderate complexity tend to fare worse.
Want the news delivered to you? Get the top stories delivered to your inbox every morning. Sign up here: VailDaily.com/newsletter
The television “highlights” reels that the networks routinely show from the debates are filled with one-liners, gaffes and falsehoods that sympathetic journalists often treat as truth, but I have never seen a truly thoughtful explanation of the national debt or any other serious issue that is hailed as a great moment in debate history.
While the prospect of a Biden-Trump rematch is especially worthy of a “What? Really?”, the truth is that every presidential debate deserves the same shoutout.
Jonah Goldberg is the editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is Jonah Dispatch.
