Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 10/28/2020
When I went to bed on Oct. 22, I knew there was one thing I was guaranteed to wake up to – a deluge of social media posts about the final presidential debate.
It’s always an interesting hodgepodge of what appears to be running commentary on various statements made by the candidates (that out of context are at times really hilarious) and friends and family claiming their candidate won, regardless of what was actually said.
It has probably been about two decades since I have actively watched a debate. I avoid them.
Why? Because in my mind debates are the reality TV of national politics. They’re short on substance and most people know that, yet for some reason a high level of importance and attention are placed on them.
For many, it’s the lazy way to become “informed” about what the candidates stand for, and, well, now it’s gotten worse with people now just latching on to whatever little clip from the debate is making the rounds.
Anyone who has done their research or followed the news on anything more than a superficial level knows the candidates’ platforms. They may not fully understand the nuances of the policy they wish to implement, but a debate isn’t going to provide that for them anyway. Primary debates don’t provide enough substance because of the sheer volume of candidates and the need to give equal time in short windows.
The debates from the past two presidential races involving Donald Trump have devolved into what previously probably would have been considered hyperbole, but the exercise has always been kind of a waste. The first televised presidential debate in 1960 allowed a window into politics that had never been seen before. The memorable aspect of that historic moment? Nixon looked sweaty.
Especially in today’s world of 24-hour news cycles and social media that allow us to see national politics in a much different light, I see debates as becoming more and more irrelevant.
Now, I don’t think the idea of debating overall is a poor one. Locally and regionally, where politics don’t get the same kind of play on these other platforms, I do think they can provide the valuable service that national debates are intended to.
But on the national level, I think we need to reevaluate the approach and how to best serve voters. I don’t know exactly what that would look like, but these debates certainly aren’t it.