Trump-Biden debate will be rehearsed soundbites and zingers. Can we fix that? | Opinion

The first presidential debate of the 2024 cycle, set for tonight in Atlanta, is “must-see TV.” The political world will be watching to see if Joe Biden will make a mistake that leads his detractors to argue he doesn’t have what it takes to serve as president — and if Donald Trump can explain why a convicted felon should be president.

In other words, expectations are not terribly high for this Biden-Trump clash.

Debates between candidates are not what they once were. Some are wondering if they matter at all. There are a lot of reasons for this, but we should not give up on this proud American tradition that once held great importance in our campaign process.

When debates went wrong

One of the most famous presidential debates was in 1960, when John F. Kennedy squared off against Richard Nixon in the first-ever televised debate in U.S. history.

Aside from its historic nature, and the other three debates that year, 1960 represents both a high and a low in point in debates. The benefit of TV taking candidates directly into the homes of voters cannot be overstated.

However, this is the moment when image became everything in politics, debates included. Indeed, someone who listened to the radio broadcast of the Kennedy-Nixon debate was more likely to say Nixon “won,” but someone who watched on TV was more likely to give the win to Kennedy. This, arguably, set us on the path to where we are today.

Who to blame for modern debates?

Candidate debates today are often nothing more than battles of soundbites, focus grouped and rehearsed during debate prep. In addition to getting in a good “zinger” during the debate, candidates hope those one-liners will be the focus of coverage in the days that follow. These days, the post-debate spin room and next-day news show appearances may be just as important as the debate, as candidate surrogates either continue the candidate’s messaging or clean up a mistake made during the debate.

So, the media and candidates certainly shoulder some blame for the lack of substantive debates today. However, another group shares in this blame for the paucity and quality of debates today: – the public.

In short, we let this happen.

We allow candidates to get on stage and avoid answering questions about their vision, to avoid confronting criticism about their records or proposals.

We simply don’t demand that candidates commit to this form of campaigning. We also don’t ask that the journalists moderating debates create a format that provides quality information to voters. Instead, when debates do take place, they are a series of rehearsed answers that fit neatly into 15-, 30- or 60-second windows of time.

As a result, candidate debates today are not what they could — or should — be.

We can fix it

But that doesn’t mean they are lost forever. Voters deserve regular, high-quality, informative, civil and respectful discussions between those seeking to be our leaders.

It won’t be easy, but the public can (and needs to) start expecting more from candidates.

We don’t have to settle for a series of soundbites.

Here’s how we can dive deeper into the issues voters care about:

• Longer response windows, beyond the minute or so customarily allotted

• More ground rules about attacking an opponent — candidates should be able to communicate their vision without going on the attack

• Use debates to give voters a reason to support a candidate, not simply oppose the other candidate

Support the Michigan Debate Task Force

Without debates, the candidates are free to control the narrative through paid advertising – TV ads, digital ads, mail or pre-planned social media posts. We can, and should, expect more from those who want to be our leaders.

I am fortunate to be part of an effort to bring more and higher-quality debates to our state. The Michigan Debate Task Force will host three debates during the general election phase of the campaign for Michigan’s open US Senate seat, between the two candidates who emerge from party primaries to appear on the general election ballot, along with a few additional criteria. (Editor’s note: The Detroit Free Press has endorsed the task force and its debate proposals.)

We will soon launch a website with a portal through which anyone in Michigan can submit a question, or suggest an issue they would like to hear the candidates discuss. The task force trusts the public will get behind our efforts, and let the candidates know that we expect them to participate in all three debates, and give voters a chance to hear from them in an unproduced and unfiltered forum.

We can fix this

Tonight’s presidential debate is likely to produce fireworks fitting for the Fourth of July.

Unfortunately, this is likely to be for the wrong reasons. But, we shouldn’t turn our collective back on candidate debates.

The opportunities provided by the debate format are too important to jettison.

David Dulio is a political science professor at Oakland University and executive director of the university's Center for Civic Engagement. Submit a letter to the editor at freep.com/letters, and we may publish it in print or online.  

This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Trump-Biden debate is leaving voters cold. We can fix that | Opinion