Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedCan winning the presidential debates affect the election outcome?
Results so far:
| Yes | 84% | 70 votes | Total: 83 votes | |
| No | 16% | 13 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesPresidential debates very often change the minds of independent and undecided voters and in a close election, they can turn the tide from one candidate to another and affect the election outcome. Voters have become more savvy about ideology however and many of us stay within our political party based on the core values of that party. Crossover voters are not in plentiful supply when we look at the election in that light.
Presidential debates offer su a closer look at the candidates. We watch their demeanor, their ability to respond to debate questions and their interaction. At the end of the debate however, we discuss how our candidate could have made a point here or there and how many contradictions the opposing candidate made. Our candidate is always right.
With the technology of the Internet, voters can prepare for the debates by getting to know the issues and positions of the debate candidates. It's much easier for voters to research candidates and make a decision as to the one who best exemplifies their own values.
The major work of the presidential camcapigns goes on behind the scenes with obtaining endorsements and contributions. Without these voter blocks, the race is straight uphill. It's also important to organize voter drives to bring people to the polls to vote on election day, or earlier in some states where voting starts a full month ahead of election day before debates are completed.
Presidenti al debates are a historic event in US politics and we've enjoyed reading about them and watching them while we make comparisons between the candidates. We cheer our candidate on as we watch or we groan with a missed opportunity to skewer the opposition. Debates are never boring to political junkies.
The first televised debate occurred in 1960 between Vice President Richard M Nixon and Massachusetts Senator, John F. Kennedy. The TV camera loved Kennedy but didn't like Nixon at all. Kennedy appeared loose and at ease while Nixon appeared to be somewhat rigid. I don't remember the substance of that debate but I do remember how the black and white images projected the candidates to the voting public.
Kennedy had a political power base too, however. It was the Chicago Daley machine that secured the nomination for John Kennedy. (Senior Mayer Daley)
In the 2008 presidential election, the choices are a very liberal candidate who votes with his party 97 percent of the time and espouses an activist government. The other candidate is a moderate to liberal candidate who votes his party 88 percent of the time. Economy is always an important factor as is national security. Their debates thus far have left us with questions as to how they plan to acheive their goals.
As we moved closer to the election, we've see debates that put the candidates closer to the middle ground on issues, because that is where the majority of US voters are situated. You may see them even agreeing on issues in debates, but play it safe and take it with a grain of salt; depend on their accomplishments and records to help you decide.
The political pundits and press decide who wins the debates on TV, but with all their editorializing and guessing, it's still the voter who pulls the lever in the voting booth. Undecided and independent voters will tip the scales in this election so keep an eye on those voters.
Learn more about this author, Mona Gallagher.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
Probably the most famous Presidential debate was the first between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon in 1960. It was the first televised debate, and while those listening on radio thought it was either a tie or slightly in Nixon's favor, those watching on TV overwhelmingly felt that Kennedy had won. It was a clear case of style trumping substance; Kennedy simply looked better on television than Nixon did, and this may very well have been enough to give Kennedy the slim margin he needed to win (in the popular vote he won by only 118,000 votes).
Ronald Reagan solidified his reputation as the Great Communicator during the Presidential debates of 1980 and 1984, and his use of humor at key points was critical in presenting him as confident, relaxed, and, amazingly, more vibrant than the much younger Jimmy Carter in 1980 and Walter Mondale in 1984. There was no real question that Reagan would win in 1984, but his performance in the 1980 debates helped him defeat the incumbent Carter.
The 1988 debates were not so much won by George H.W. Bush as lost by Michael Dukakis. Dukakis' answer when asked if he would change his opinion of the death penalty if his wife were raped and murdered made him appear cold and emotionless to the American public. He stood by his opposition to the death penalty in all cases, which was admirable, but by not adding a simple statement like "I'd kill him (the murderer) myself," he came across as almost robotic. I don't know how much this impacted the race nationwide, but my grandmother (who was 74 at the time and had never voted for a Republican in her life) wouldn't vote for Dukakis because of this.
In a turnabout from 1988, George H.W. Bush was on the wrong end of the compassion issue in 1992. While Bush looked at his watch as if he had better things to do, Bill Clinton left the podium to walk up to a questioner in the audience to assure her that he "felt her pain." After Reagan, Clinton was the best communicator this century, and the debates helped him win.
By 2000 the landscape had changed, and remains so to this day. The debates of 2000 and 2004 did little to sway anyone either way, because most had already made up their minds. In 2008 John McCain will, like George W. Bush before him, spend a great deal of time prior to the debates lowering expectations by pointing out that he's simply not as good a speaker as Barack Obama, as if the entire country didn't already know that. But it won't matter, because 98% of the population has already made up their mind who they'll vote for (at least according to the polls), and we already know who's going to win the debates.
The other drawback these days is that debates aren't really debates. Both candidates will find a way, regardless of the question, to trot out the talking points we've been hearing for over a year now. We won't learn anything new or surprising about with McCain or Obama, and in the end it will be like watching a 90-minute campaign commercial. With any luck, there will be a football game on that night.
Learn more about this author, Bruno Somerset.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- US Elections (Other)
- Is it ever too early to run for president?
- Parents should be allowed to cast as many votes as they have children
- Should absentee ballots be allowed in US elections?
- Should federal political candidates have to reveal the names of all their donors, not just those who give them more than $200?
- Should Senators resign their seats to run for President?
