The key query that the Biden-Trump debate could potentially clarify for electors
Presidential Showdowns usually garner more importance fordisplaying the candidates' personality and competence rather than clarifying the policy disagreements between them. This might be even truer this year as both Biden and Trump make their way onto the debate stage in Atlanta, facing fundamental questions about whether they possess the physical, mental, and moral abilities needed for the presidency.
Biden faces skepticism about his capacity to manage the presidency today, let alone the subsequent four years. Conversely, Trump's biggest challenge lies in his character: Although evaluations of his presidency have improved in the past, many voters remain unconvinced he possesses the ethics, commitment to the law, or moral compass they seek in a president.
Each debate performance could either alleviate or exacerbate these concerns. A shaky or hesitant display from Biden may solidify doubts among voters regarding his age and physical strength. Meanwhile, an aggressive or volatile performance from Trump, akin to what he displayed in the first debate between the two men in 2020, could strengthen voter concerns that welcoming him back to the Oval Office might result in perpetual chaos and conflict.
There's an ongoing debate among political scholars and practitioners concerning the significance of presidential debates. While the majority of academics, analyzing polling data throughout decades, believe that the debates may have a minute impact, if any, on the election outcomes, those involved in political campaigns have a more positive perspective. Campaign practitioners often argue that debates can be turning points, refining attitudes about the candidates that had been brewing during the campaign but weren't yet set in stone.
Over the history of presidential debates, these pivotal moments have infrequently revolved around one candidate outshining another in an argument about specific policy points. As academics like Christopher Wlezien, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin and co-author of "The Timeline of Presidential Elections," explain, each candidate appears more poised and persuasive on some subjects, while struggling on others. "Think about all the different issues discussed," Wlezien points out, "One day, one candidate might perform impressively, while the next day, it could be the other. It's a bit like that throughout the course of a debate."
As Wlezien explains, it's unclear if the sum of all these moments will have a substantial impact. Each candidate has usually maintained an advantage on specific subjects while facing criticism on others.
The most impactful moments in presidential debates have often revolved around shaping voters' opinions about the personal character and fitness of the candidates. Typically, these don't hinge on intricate policy discussions but rather on the strength, confidence, vigor, and empathy each candidate projects. As political advisor Doug Sosnik points out, you can often tell who's winning a debate simply by watching it without the sound.
Famously, in the first televised presidential debate in 1960, the physical contrast between the fresh and confident John F. Kennedy and the solemn and sweaty Richard Nixon accentuated Kennedy's argument that he could offer the nation the needed generational change and fresh energy.
Similarly, when President George H.W. Bush checked his watch during a town hall-style debate in 1992 with challengers Clinton and Perot, it instantly symbolized Clinton's argument that Bush had lost the energy and enthusiasm needed to deal with the nation's domestic challenges.
One of the most telling instances of personal signals overshadowing policy arguments in a debate occurred during the sole 1980 encounter between President Jimmy Carter and his Republican opponent, Ronald Reagan. Facing widespread dissatisfaction with his record and the state of the economy, Carter maintained a close race by raising doubts about whether Reagan was too extreme ideologically and too warlike to risk nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union.
During the debate, Carter accurately questioned Reagan's stance on Medicare, pointing out that his opposition to its creation meant he was unlikely to support expanded health insurance coverage, a policy Carter believed Americans required. Carter even managed to connect Reagan's past record with a forward-looking contrast on an important issue for voters.
Yet, Carter's tactics backfired spectacularly when Reagan dismissed Carter's accusations with his famous line, "There you go again." In fact, in his response, Reagan misrepresented his own views on Medicare; Carter had correctly stated them. However, Reagan's amiable and self-assured response instantly undermined Carter's representation of him as scary and risky. Reagan, at the debate, demonstrated that he was "neither a warmonger nor a simpleton," wrote William Safire, former Nixon speechwriter turned acerbic New York Times columnist. "With that proof, the Carter campaign of fear against Reagan crumbled."
The political landscape of this year's debate between Biden and Trump shares some parallels with past contests, yet features differences that might introduce shifting dynamics. Lynn Vavreck, a UCLA political scientist and author of respected books on the 2016 and 2020 presidential races, anticipates this year's debates will subtly impact the voters' decisions at best. The unique factor now, she points out, is that, given the country's narrow division, even slight shifts in opinions among small groups of voters could considerably impact the outcome.
"These elections hinge on a minimal number of votes in a tiny number of states, which implies that almost anything you could think of could be decisive," Vavreck said. "You don't have to sway opinions by 5 points; you only need to shift 5,000 votes."
Both sides view the opposition as vulnerable on crucial matters. Republicans are enthusiastic about Trump presenting his argument against Biden's presidency, focusing on inflation and immigration. Conversely, Democrats see a prime opportunity for Biden to portray Trump as a threat to women's rights and democracy, and to depict his economic strategy as a benefit for the rich and big corporations.
"Many people struggling now are seeking a candidate to disrupt the system," said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, a liberal group. "By repositioning Trump as beholden to billionaires and giant corporations, this shift alterates the dynamic, making him no longer the change-agent but the issue."
However, given the reservations both candidates face concerning their personal qualities, their on-stage rhetoric might be less essential compared to their delivery. In many ways, Trump's predicament resembles Reagan's in 1980 and Clinton's in 1992. As in those races, most voters consistently express their disapproval of the incumbent's performance. This means the challenger doesn't have to convince most Americans to dismiss the incumbent; instead, the challenge is to convince voters already inclined to replace the president that he's a suitable alternative.
With that objective, strategists from both parties agree Trump's primary focus at the debate should be to reassure undecided voters about his temperament, ethics, and stability. "The chance here is to demonstrate that he's no longer the same unpredictable and extremist Trump," said Jason Cabel Roe, former executive director of the Michigan Republican Party. Roe, earlier a frequent Trump critic, now supports Trump's chances of winning Michigan. "If he maintains a more composed demeanor," Roe added, "I believe he'll reap significant benefits from this debate."
Needless to say, it's uncertain whether Trump will be able to conform to this standard, given his boisterous and controversy-filled rally performances this year. Trump's repeated claims that the 2020 election was stolen could potentially trip him up, as Roe explains, "Repeating such arguments will likely trigger him because, to this day, I haven't seen him phrase them in a convincing manner." Similarly, Trump's promise to pardon some of the January 6, 2021, rioters, whom he's called "warriors" and "victims," presents another potential pitfall.
Meanwhile, Biden's main objective is to challenge the prevailing narrative that he's past his prime and unable to handle the job effectively. Just as Trump's condition echoes Reagan's in the 1980 debate, Biden's predicament mirrors Reagan's in the 1984 debates, where he was 73, making him the oldest president in American history. While Reagan maintained a consistent lead over Democratic nominee Walter Mondale throughout the 1984 campaign, Reagan's uneven performance in the first debate spawned speculation about his age, a previously untouchable subject. "Leaving the first debate stage, Mondale told his aides, 'This is what the White House has been hiding from us for the past six months.' He was genuinely shocked and upset," Galston, Mondale's top issue advisor in the 1984 campaign, recalled.
In the second debate with his opponent, Reagan mastered a contentious issue by using a popular phrase, affirming, "I won't utilize age as a campaign matter." He asserted, "I won't exploit, for political reasons, my adversary's youth and lack of experience." Onstage, his opponent chuckled, but Galston reported that both the candidate and the top advisers perceived Reagan had closed the opportunity he had opened in the first debate for his opponent to make the race more competitive — with that answer in the second.
Galston states it won't be a simple task for Biden to dismiss rumors about his age. "Biden's scenario is harder; it's not comparable to Reagan, as the age issue for Reagan was raised by a single episode in the first debate," Galston stated. "In Biden's case, a persistent series of commentaries over a long period of time has raised doubts about his age. The negative impression Biden needs to counter is far more entrenched. I don't envision a single sentence being as effective for Biden as it was for Reagan. I believe his challenge is to deliver a continuous, concentrated performance for 90 minutes."
The personal and political points Biden aims to make at the debate might intersect. The president's major policy weakness is his record on inflation. His primary strategy to counter Republican attacks based on higher prices has been to highlight how he is challenging influential entities to reduce costs, for instance, by using Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices with pharmaceutical companies. According to Green, it would be more impactful for Biden to show voters his strength by battling Trump instead of just informing them how hard he is fighting for them against those interests.
Several things could go wrong at the debate for Trump, but among the two participants, it appears that Biden is encountering more durable hurdles, as only about two-fifths of the population consistently say they approve of his job performance, and nearly double the number indicating they believe he's too old for the position.
As a consequence, the range of possible outcomes for Biden at the debate may be broader than for Trump. If Biden delivers a successful performance that lessens concerns about his capabilities, noted Galston, it "could reshape public perceptions about who he is as a person right now. If it goes exceptionally well, I think it could bring the race back to even."
If the debate goes poorly for the president, the Democratic apprehension about re-nominating Biden, which decreased after the State of the Union, may escalate to emergency levels.
"The stakes for Trump are significant," said Galston, a view shared by many strategists in both parties. "The stakes for Biden are far greater."
