If you’re older, you might list Ronald Reagan’s devastating quip about Walter Mondale’s “youth and inexperience.” If you’re younger, you might recall George W. Bush’s nod-off of Al Gore after the vice president lurched behind him during an answer. Or maybe you remember George H.W. Bush checking his watch or Michael Dukakis’ death penalty fiasco or Al Gore’s infamous lockbox.
Those highlights all have one thing in common: none of them rank highly on the substance scale. Reagan telling off Mondale might have turned the tide in the 1984 presidential election, but in no way did it demonstrate that he was better qualified to run the country (though he was).
So why are these the moments that stick in our minds? Because in the age of television, presidential debates have become superficial affairs. We might hope for a genuine dialectic, we might strap on our policy wonk eyeshades, but ultimately we enjoy debates because they humanize the candidates for us. Our real interest is less in what they say than how they say it. This is why TV maestro Donald Trump is the inevitable beneficiary of every cable news matchup in which he participates. It’s also why Marco Rubio won the last debate despite saying little of substance.
And it’s why recent Republican attempts to regulate future debates are so ridiculous.
Following a CNBC forum in which the candidates seemed to spar more with the moderators than each other, representatives from several GOP campaigns met at a hotel in Alexandria to discuss retribution. The result was a draft letter they intend to send future Republican debate sponsors. It asks the networks to provide not just routine information like the moderators and length, but commitments not to, among other things, ask the candidates to raise their hands, pose yes-or-no questions, allow candidate-to-candidate inquiries, and show reaction shots from the audience.
One wonders if previous drafts banned questions altogether.
As Chris Christie, whose campaign abstained from the letter, aptly put it: “Stop complaining…set up a stage, put podiums up there, and let’s just go.” It’s reached the point of cliché but it’s worth repeating: how are the candidates going to take on Vladimir Putin if they can’t handle three talking heads on CNBC?
Even more glaring than the letter’s petulance is how politically boneheaded it is. Did anyone notice how after the last debate, none of the candidates were judged to have “lost”? (Well, except for Jeb Bush, but he doesn’t really count at this point.)
Instead the headline screaming from every Politico nook and cranny was that Republicans had routed the incompetent media. “CNBC moderators crash and burn at the Republican debate,” proclaimed Buzzfeed. “CNBC was debate’s biggest loser,” headlined columnist Michael Reagan. The most shared clips of the night were those of the candidates bashing the moderators, including when Ted Cruz channeled the spirit of Newt Gingrich and demanded to know why they weren’t “talking about the substantive issues.”
Some of this was a bit precious. The question that set Cruz off was about the debt ceiling, a perfectly “substantive” issue in this age of budgeting-by-crisis. But the fact remains that nothing plays to the conservative base like attacking the media, and nothing plays to the narcissistic media like drama over one of its own. Let the viral clips proliferate! And they did. It was a good night for the GOP.
Besides, this whining is giving Republican critics ammunition. “Have you noticed that every one of these candidates say, ‘Obama’s weak. Putin’s kicking sand in his face,’” President Obama smirked. “Then it turns out they can’t handle a bunch of CNBC moderators at the debate.” It’s a dark day when I have to admit this in print, but the failed community organizer has a point. Far easier for me to quote is Megyn Kelly, who read the Republican demands and wondered if they should have included foot massages.
Already, Republican efforts at debate reform seem to be falling apart, as the Christie, Kasich, Trump, and Fiorina campaigns have all refused to participate. The others should pull out as well. At the very least, the next commander-in-chief needs to be capable of sparring with a hostile moderator.
And who knows? Doing so might even produce one of those rare debate moments we never forget. Being humanized as grumpy with the mainstream media is not something that hurts you in a Republican primary.
Matt Purple is the Deputy Editor for Rare Politics (Rare.us). Read more at http://rare.us/voices/matt-purple/
About the Author