A presidential campaign with some strange or unprecedented developments has been retrograde, with the added oddity of conflict over candidate debates.
It should be the underdog, or at least the second-place challenger, who cries out to go one-on-one in an epic clash of questions and answers. And like a horse brushing its tail off a horsefly, it's usually the front-runner who despises a noisy challenger.
Although the margin is close, poll after poll shows President Joe Biden trailing former President Donald Trump. But it's President Trump who says Americans have a right to watch TV debates, and Biden says, “Well, maybe, maybe not.”
There should be something in each candidate's campaign research that explains their position.
Despite Trump's lead in the polls, many of his former powerful allies, including Stormy Daniels, the January 6th Capitol riot, and even the vice president, are asking why this is happening. Mr. Trump's people may see vulnerability if he takes the stage with questioners who ask him whether he is a political leader or not. They are now warning him not to return to the White House. His bombastic personal style, slander, and claims of personal persecution all sell well at his large MAGA rallies, but in the dignified atmosphere of a debate stage, they can come across as crass and bullying. .
Of course, what many of Mr. Trump's viewers love about him is crude bullying.
And despite the incumbency's news-making benefits, the aura of the presidency itself, Biden's leaders likely find him looking old and unstable, or worse, something they don't like. He's probably worried about making a gaffe that will remind everyone. he. As audiences across the country watch in-depth discussions about Ukraine, inflation and immigration, we don't want to see the octogenarian chief executive fumbling for words or confusing the president of Mexico with the head of Egypt again.
The National Commission on Presidential Debates recorded four showdowns between Trump and Biden between September 16 and October 9. Twelve news organizations, including major networks, released a joint letter last week urging both candidates to debate.
“If there's one thing Americans can agree on in this era of polarization, it's that the stakes in this election are very high,” their statement said. “Against that backdrop, there is no substitute for candidates discussing their vision for our country's future before each other and before the American people.”
Really? I think there are many people who still don't have a fixed impression of Donald Trump and Joe Biden. If you haven't decided yet by the fall, what are the chances you'll vote anyway?
It's natural to think that networks and major publishers are more interested in capturing the attention of their audiences than in informing the public about important issues. There's nothing wrong with that. They are in business and want to promote their product, or news, to as many people as possible.
The showdown between Trump and Biden will be similar to the famous “battle of the sexes” from 50 years ago. That's when self-proclaimed propagandist Bobby Riggs challenged Billie Jean King to a televised tennis match. It meant nothing, but it drew a large audience.
And is there “no alternative” to argument? Somehow, from Kennedy vs. Nixon in 1960 to Carter-Ford in 1976, we managed to do without them. And what does anyone remember primarily about a debate? The appearance, not the information.
Nixon's piercing eyes and sweaty brow and Kennedy's casual sophistication, Ford's remark that the Soviet Union did not control Eastern Europe (he wanted to say that Poland would not accept Kremlin control), and Bill Clinton. George H.W. Bush was seen looking at his watch impatiently during his speech. . And, of course, there was President Reagan's “Here we go again'' tirade against Carter.
Debate coaches actually try to inspire their clients and predict what will come from the other side. And everyone uses arguing, or refusing to argue, as a tactic. That's why President Trump this year denied equal footing to all of his major Republican opponents.
It would be good for the country if Biden and Trump could have a serious conversation about the future of Social Security and Medicare, climate change, and immigration policy. Voters have a right to be told about their foreign policy and economic plans without calling each other names or distorting the record.
It would be a real debate, not a forensic version of professional wrestling. And three-quarters of his viewers change the channel after less than 20 minutes.
Bill Cotterell is a former Capitol Hill reporter for United Press International and the Tallahassee Democrat. Contact him at wrcott43@aol.com.
