Larry J. Sabato says that debates have, historically, had little effect on presidential elections. Going by poll data, very few people change their minds after watching a presidential debate. There have been some exceptions. In 1976, Gerald Ford denied, in the midst of the Cold War, that there was any Soviet domination of Eastern Europe. Every school child knew better. Worse, he doubled down on his ridiculous claim and gave details about it. He lost the election. For the most part, however, people usually vote on straight party loyalty, although ethnicity and income level also help to predict people's voting. This has all been known ever since the 1948 Elmira voting study.
The 1856 Lincoln-Douglas debates helped to make Lincoln famous. Since then, however, debates' impact has been much discussed but little proven.
Debates are, of course, about issues, and issues have, rather strangely, little effect on how people vote. Republicans who thought it was just fine for Reagan and the Bushes to run up huge budget deficits thought it was awful when Obama did it. Democrats now mostly favor same-sex marriage. In general, people tend to shift their opinions to match their candidates, not to pick candidates because of the issues. So, learning that an issue position is right or wrong does not necessarily change how people will vote.
The debates are still useful. First, people who have not followed the campaign closely may watch the debates, and will learn more about the candidates' views. Second, the debates give voters a change to size up a candidate's personality and character. Since, sadly, most Americans know very little about political issues, the debates give them a chance to learn something.
Still, tomorrow's debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump might be more important than usual. First, many people think that Clinton is dishonest and ruthless; if she turns in a calm, issue-oriented debate performance, some negative feelings about her might calm down a bit. Second, since pundits have labeled Trump as volatile and unreliable, potential supporters may want to size up his presidential mettle. The voters can judge whether the candidates show elementary courtesy.
Much also depends on the moderator: will the moderator enforce the rules strictly (like Candy Crowley), or loosely (like Jim Lehrer)? Will the moderator fact-check the candidates (an important but very, very tricky undertaking)? Will the moderator ask good questions? We'll see.
Tomorrow's debate format, which resembles that of earlier debates, is very weak. Candidates are to give two-minute answers, and two-minute answers do not give candidates enough time to explain and prove their points. Sigh.
No comments:
Post a Comment