Televised debates

                Another means by which momentum can be generated behind a campaign is via televised debates. This has been a feature of American elections since 1960. During that famous debate, John F. Kennedy faced Richard Nixon. The debonair New Englander appeared more confident and more polished than Nixon; although radio listeners thought that Nixon had won the debate. Under the unforgiving lens of the television cameras, Nixon lost out to his rather more telegenic opponent. The next debate did not occur until 1976, when technical difficulties led to a loss of reception for the viewing public. Despite this small setback, the practice has been a feature of presidential contests ever since.

                There are four general observations to be made about presidential debates. Firstly, style is more important than actual substance. The body language and overall attitude of the candidates is likely to have a far greater impact on viewer’s perceptions than the actual words used. The public rarely give their undivided attention to politicians, but they do get a ‘feel’ for those who seek elected office. For instance, in the year 2000 Al Gore squared up to George W. Bush in a move that jarred with Gore’s wonkish image. Bush managed to diffuse the situation with a cheeky wink of his eye, and it was Gore who came across in a poor manner. Gore also sighed and grimaced when Bush was talking, which added further weight to people’s impression of him as a liberal elitist.

Secondly, a poorly answered question can be very costly to a campaign. In 1988, Mike Dukakis was asked whether he would support the death penalty if a loved one had been attacked. Whilst doubtless heartfelt, his answer made him appear weak. It also reinforced a negative that had come to be associated with the Democrats at that time. Thirdly, a good soundbite can be very useful to a campaign. Soundbites are emblematic of an era in which we give so little of our attention towards politicians. The media will also repeat a soundbite, thereby giving such comments a degree of longevity. There are several examples one might readily consider, although the past master is surely Ronald Reagan. In 1980, he replied to Carter’s rambling delivery with “there you go again” and in 1984, he managed to deflect doubts about his age with good humor. Delivering a well-timed joke can be a very useful weapon in any politician’s armory, particularly if it adds to their folksy persona. Finally, it is usually more difficult for incumbents than challengers because the former has more to lose. This was certainly the case during the first debate held in 2012, although Obama later regained his composure and style.

                Televised debates provide a tremendous opportunity to persuade potential voters. Although many will have already made up their minds beforehand, there will in any given presidential election be a sizeable number of voters who are essentially ‘up for grabs.’ During the performance a successful candidate must reassure his committed supporters whilst reaching out towards the uncommitted. As is the nature of politics, it is a delicate balancing act that requires a deft understanding of people’s wants and fears. He will face questions from an independent moderator based on the theme of the debate itself. In 2012, these were domestic policy, foreign policy and a wide-ranging town hall format in which a number of issues were covered.

                During the 2012 campaign the impact of the televised debates was negligible. Neither candidate made any costly mistakes or memorable gaffes. Equally, no candidate delivered a sucker punch commensurable with Reagan’s comedic put-down of Walter Mondale. In the opening debate, Obama looked weary whereas Romney came across well. However, the last two debates were more evenly fought. Obama once again demonstrated his sharp intellect and impressive oratory skills, but Mitt Romney did better than some might have assumed. On balance, neither candidate managed to gain sufficient momentum during the debates. The vice-presidential debate also failed to impact significantly upon the contest for the White House.

                In truth, it is quite rare for a televised debate to be a game-changer. Perhaps the last really significant presidential debate dates back to 1992. The Republican candidate George Bush senior appeared distant and disinterested, whereas Bill Clinton showed empathy and understanding. The 1992 debate (and the 1996 debate) involved the third party candidate Ross Perot. The likelihood of a third party candidate participating has since been reduced due to rule changes. The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) has certain criteria that candidates must meet in order to be eligible. Firstly, they must be constitutionally eligible. Secondly, they must appear on enough state ballots to potentially gain a majority of the Electoral College. Finally, they must average at least 15% on five selected polls. These changes were instigated by the two main parties in order to prevent the emergence of a credible third party candidate. Frankly, it is the last of these requirements that prevents a third party candidate from say the Libertarian Party or the Green Party appearing with their Democrat and GOP equivalent. That said; third party candidates are not exactly barred from debating. Indeed, some of the minor party candidates conducted their own debate in 2012.