Debate on Debates
Predictably, it’s the time of year when the political debate becomes about debates.
As someone who used to host and organize debates among political candidates, let me be clear: they are a complete waste of time, and so is the current debate about debates.
In the last 20 years, name me a situation in a candidate debate in Iowa that made a difference—either gave us some light about a position or issue, or showed a candidate in either a favorable or unfavorable light.
The bottom line is that they are nice rigid events, where the candidates barely acknowledge the other person’s presence. They are essentially joint news conferences, where canned answers are provided to predictable questions.
But at this point, the battle of the news releases is taking place…Candidate A charges Candidate B with ducking debates, Candidate B says Candidate A welched on his or her original promise to meet, there will then be a fight about format, and so on and so on.
None of this, of course, has anything to do with how candidates stand on issues, or how they would respond in a given situation—other than staff members duking it out in their respective candidate’s name.
And even if events are held, they’ll be predictable and boring, featuring predictable responses from party regulars all claiming their candidate was the clear winner. Sometimes, those response news releases are accidentally sent before the event is over; their crystal balls must be that good.
So enough debate about debates. How about issuing a policy statement about an issue that impacts Iowans…instead of a schoolyard brawl about whose turn it is to jump on the swing.
