Editorial | Why debate?
Photo illustration by RUPALI INGLE, Illustrator
Last month, America witnessed one of the most embarrassing presidential debates of our lifetime: the first head-to-head matchup between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden. We sat on the edge of our seats watching men, one of whom would become the leaders of our country, bicker like children for the whole world to see. After all the finger-pointing and interrupting finally subsided, it would have – at the very least – been worth it if we could conclusively say that debating helped the American people decide their future leader. Instead, it left us with nothing but a feeling of hopelessness for our nation and a looming question in our heads: Why are debates still held in the first place?
As far as we can see, debates don't seem to accomplish anything. There’s no need to cling to this tradition. Similar to the other numerous nuts and bolts under the hood of our government, presidential debates are out of date and require remodeling. It’s not like they’re required by the Constitution. They almost always feel more like a publicity stunt and power grab by TV corporations than an intelligent and productive discussion on our nation's biggest issues.
Before, during and after each debate, people flock to Twitter, Instagram, Facebook and TikTok to make jokes, repost clips and publish memes of the candidates. Sometimes it feels like a lot of people don’t really even listen to the debate; they just tune in for the trending hashtags and juiciest moments. Take the fly, for instance. That little guy got way more publicity than any of the points made at the vice presidential debate.
One of the most important pieces to current debates are the post-debate fact-checkers – providing the only real pieces of information Americans get. The fact that we even need fact-checkers is truly shocking. We are assuming from the beginning that at least one of our candidates will lie, and are in turn preparing ourselves to set the record straight. We may as well have the fact-checkers lead the debate discourse than the presidential nominees themselves.
Yet despite our knowledge that we won’t glean much actual information, we all still tuned into the final debate like it was the latest episode of our favorite reality TV program. “What crazy thing is Trump going to say this time?” we thought, or, “Is Biden going to tell Trump to shut up again?” as we shoved popcorn in our faces.
Politics and debates are quickly morphing into some archaic political farce as American citizens turn to these events for sheer sensationalism, like we’re attending an Aristophanes play in 6th-century Athens. We might as well be throwing rotten tomatoes at our TV screens. Not many people are watching these debates with an open mind to be persuaded to the opposing side.
Let’s face it, most of us already know who we want to vote for before the debates take place. Our country is so polarized that any political figurehead, whether good or bad, no longer matters; it’s all about pitting the two political parties against one another. You’re either with the Republicans or the Democrats. More than 6.9 million Californians and 59 million Americans have already cast their vote for the 2020 election, as of Oct. 24 and Oct. 25 respectively. Most of our editorial board has already voted too. So if everyone is set in their ways anyway, why debate?
The only function of debates, as presently constructed, is to widen an ever-increasing partisan gap.
Different presidential candidates won’t improve the aggressive nature ingrained within debates. Different presidential candidates also won’t slow the pop culture’s inclination to dramatize, sensationalize and exploit the debate’s contents. If the sole purpose of presidential debates – to persuade undecided voters – are rendered useless, then there’s simply no longer any need for them. So please do us all a favor, TV corporations and White House politicians, and destroy this archaic convention.