In the United States, political debate has become a hallmark of the electoral process. The Kennedy-Nixon series of 1960 shaped America’s political narrative and introduced voters to the concept of presidential debates, which would soon be considered an American institution.
Yet, despite the weight that political debates carry and the important role they play in our democracy, a new study suggests that Americans are not nearly as well informed about the purpose of these discussions as they might believe. In fact, many people misperceive not only the frequency of political debates, but also the format and the way that they work.
The exact format of a leaders’ debate varies, but in general, the event starts with a short opening statement from each leader. Then a panel of journalists asks sets of prepared questions that the leaders answer individually or collectively, with some time left over for a free-for-all discussion. The event is often anchored by a moderator who attempts to exercise some control over the sometimes heated exchanges.
Normally, to be invited to participate in a debate organized by the CPD, a candidate must have a “statistically feasible” chance of winning a majority of the votes available in the Electoral College, as determined by five national public opinion polling organizations defined by the organization. In addition, candidates must have at least 15 percent support from the national electorate in order to be invited.
While the debates that are produced by the CPD do serve a vital civic purpose, they have been the subject of criticism from the candidates themselves and from researchers who have examined the structure of these events. These critics have pointed out that the format of these debates lends itself to pat, rehearsed answers that offer voters little insight into the candidates’ positions and priorities.
About the Author
