I remember watching John F. Kennedy debate Richard M. Nixon in 1960. (Egads! I'm turning into one of those guys young whipper-snappers come around to interview to get "living memories".)
I happened to catch these debates, again, on public TV about 20 years ago. Watching it as an adult, I was mostly struck at how excellent they both were. Both were articulate, both were effectively making their arguments, both were impressive.
Everybody today takes it for granted that JFK won it because of make-up. Sure, he looked better, and that probably helped him some, but that debate was more a close-run thing than people today think it was.
People who watched the debate on TV gave the edge to Kennedy. People who heard it on radio gave the edge to Nixon. Some interpreted this to mean that Kennedy won on style and charisma while Nixon had the better arguments. On the other hand, Richard Nixon had a nice baritone voice. Why not credit that?
Even watching as a dispassionate observer thirty years after the fact, JFK did have appeal and energy. Nixon was occasionally given to a rather stodgy earnestness, especially this younger Nixon. (People think of Kennedy as being much younger than Nixon--they even thought that at the time--but, actually, Nixon was only 47 and Kennedy 42 in 1960.)
We didn't have debates again until 1976. Johnson wouldn't give Goldwater the time of day in 1964. Nixon debated neither Hubert Humphrey in 1968 nor George McGovern in 1972.
What everyone remembers from the '76 debate is Gerald Ford saying there was "no Soviet domination of eastern Europe" and then not even walking it back when he had a chance. I watched it in a group. Our jaws all dropped.
They say Mitt Romney has been working on some quips--"zingers," they called them, for tonight's debate in Denver. The commentators have mostly been tut-tutting about this and saying it won't work. (It is rather difficult to see Mitt Romney cracking wise and pulling it off.)
Ronald Reagan, however, got by on zingers--"There you go again" in 1980 to Jimmy Carter, and his clearly practiced, rehearsed, lame, but mildly humorous response to "the age issue" in 1984: "I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience." Heh.
In more recent years, Mike Dukakis was found wanting for not responding more emotionally to the hypothetical circumstance of his wife being raped. Who asks such a question in the first place, and for what possible purpose? (This is reminiscent of Lyndon Johnson who once told a reporter, "You get to ask a question of the President of the United States, and you ask a chickensh*t question like that?")
In 1992, George Bush Sr. was caught looking at his watch, as if to say, "How long, O Lord?" Bill Clinton, on the other hand, felt peoples' pain, and quite effectively too. (I know I watched it, but have no memory of the debate between Clinton and Bob Dole in 1996.)
As you can tell, my own reaction has often differed from that of the post-debate analysts. That was no more true than in 2000. As the debate between Al Gore and George W. Bush began to unfold, I actually started to find myself feeling sorry for George W. Bush. I thought he was making a complete fool of himself--"fuzzy math!" I remember thinking, "If this was a heavyweight fight, they'd stop it."
Yet, next day, all the commentators could talk about was Al Gore's sighing, something I myself had not even noticed at the time.
Then in 2004, President Bush had that weird contraction taped to his back during his debate with John Kerry. It seemed to me that it was some kind of communication box and people were feeding him answers. The campaign went into denial mode, which the media bought, and nothing much was heard of it.
Even with the canned answers, President Bush was not good in the first debate. He fumbled around a lot, and interspersed his rambling remarks with "hard work, hard work, hard work." You thought: No wonder Iraq is so messed up.
The 2008 debates were anti-climactic since everyone pretty much knew that the Democratic candidate would win the election. They had known this since the first day of the financial crisis in mid-September. That's when Barack Obama jumped to a seven-point lead which he never relinquished.
John McCain did better in the debates than many thought he might, but still didn't make much of a dent. Most polls gave the edge to Obama. All I remember is that McCain looked kind of "stumpy" and his suit didn't seem to fit.
Comments