Our
view
Debates
should be mandatory
From noon to 1 p.m. Democratic Gov. Gray
Davis and the Republican challenger Bill
Simon conducted what is expected to be the
only debate of the campaign to take place
before the Nov. 5 elections.
Voters who missed this solitary debate will
have to form their opinions of the candidates
based on the endless barrage of 30-second
commercials with each candidate bashing
the platform of the other. Or worse, they
will just decide who to vote for using the
ever popular “who’s better looking” method.
It is both frustrating and scary to think
that the future governor of California will
be chosen based primarily on these two methods.
What ever happened to the good old days
when debates between candidates were an
expected occurrence during a campaign? Has
technology and “progress” come so far that
candidates no longer have to debate at all
to procure votes? What has become of the
campaigning process?
Thanks to the effectiveness of the short
commercial ads, candidates now view debates
as an unnecessary, time consuming and old-fashioned
way to win votes.
Heaven forbid there be an informed voter.
Of course, Davis, like most incumbents,
also avoids debates because they pose a
risk to his current standing. He has more
to lose in a debate then he has to gain.
And in the same way, Simon can be expected
to be more enthusiastic about debates because
he really has nothing to lose.
Regardless of the candidates’ feelings about
debates, the issue remains. Is the lack
of debates really fair to the voter?
The now considered old-fashioned debate
is the only chance that voters have to actually
see the candidates in action and under pressure
without anyone telling them what the best
way to respond to a certain question or
argument is. It is the only chance the voter
has to really see what the candidate is
made of.
Even if candidates choose to spend the majority
of the debate attacking each other in the
same way that they do in their ads, at least
voters will get a chance to see them together,
and see who has the ability to formulate
a stronger argument.
More time and money should be spent attempting
to inform voters on how a candidate feels
about current issues than attempting to
destroy the reputation of the challenging
candidate, but apparently that is not what
wins the votes, and of course, the votes
are all that matters to a candidate.
In order to encourage informed voting, participation
in several debates should be a mandatory
activity during campaigns, not just an option
that a candidate can turn down. The debate
should be considered a valuable, necessary
way to see who a candidate is and how he
conducts himself under pressure, which happens
to be a large portion of what the job of
governor entails.
|
