Presidential Election, or Keeping Up with the Candidates?
During all three presidential debates, both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton steered the discussion toward issues not related to political topics.
Members of Mamaroneck High School were polled in regard to these debates. Viewers were asked if superficial issues, such as the Miss Universe Pageants and/or prior personal scandals should be permitted for discussion during structured debate. In a stunning finding, only one young adult felt that such topics should be permitted in this setting.
In a poll taken of Mamaroneck High School students and staff, only one, Mr. Antosca, said that discussing this was “fair game.” Mr. Antosca, a Mamaroneck High School French teacher stated that “it is fair game because it flusters Trump so much” and that “it is a tactic that Clinton almost has to use so that they can get Trump frustrated and rattled.” The poll revealed that although the off-topic discussions are entertaining, the majority of people feel it should not be allowed because it distracts from discussion that reveals individual philosophies and ideals, information necessary for selecting a candidate and casting a vote. Others involved in the poll felt passionately about the topic, offering additional insight and suggestions on president debate. MHS students and staff, Ryan Kliegerman, Alex Rothman, Frankie Anile Santiago, and Mrs. Ammerata all believe that discussing non-policy issues distracts the American people from actually learning about the candidates’ political beliefs. Debates should means for viewers to become knowledgeable about the issues and positions of candidates. When asked to describe the first presidential debate in one word, Ethan Kliegerman (top) stated “terrible” and Ben Alliger (bottom) said “humorous.” These words are very concerning considering the debates are intended to to be serious and the purpose is to inform citizens of a presidential candidates platform and ideas.
In the first presidential debate, during the question and answer segment, Lester Holt informed the candidates that he would be asking them the final question of the debate. Prior to the question, Hillary Clinton stated, “this is the man who has called women pigs, slobs and dogs, and someone who has said pregnancy is an inconvenience to employers…” Although Trump quickly denied the statement, she continued on, soon bringing up Alicia Machado, a latina beauty contestant. However, viewers such as Mrs. Ammerata were “hoping to hear about issues such as Syria, the debt crisis, or education, or immigration.” Also, Mrs. Ammerata believes that these debates “do not live up to the American standard” and that “Americans are better than this.” Voters were expecting to hear each candidate’s position on these major issues. When preparing for speeches, candidates will often highlight their own strengths while stressing their opponent’s flaws. The debates lacked the balance necessary, with too great an emphasis put on protecting themselves from their own weaknesses and too little spent on highlighting political strengths. Rather than key in on responding to key issues raised, the candidates focused rhetoric on criticizing the opponent.
Though it is technically permitted to talk about such topics during the debate, Trump’s interactions with Alicia Machado happened 20 years ago. Not only is the topic dated, but it also has nothing to do with the focus of the 2016 campaign and is merely a distraction to the American people. In this example, the topic of the beauty queen was brought up for the purpose of mud-slinging and slandering, rather than being used to discuss the topic of gender inequality that is a major focal point of both the Trump and Clinton campaign.
In the second presidential debate, the tables were turned when Trump initiated the attacks and began to discuss rape allegations against former President Bill Clinton, dating back to 1978. The accusations included rape, proposition, exposure, and extremely sexually offensive behavior. Those polled who believed that the Miss Universe scandal should not have been talked about during the debate all cited that Bill Clinton had “nothing to do with the problems facing Americans on a daily basis.” They believed this deflection from issues and onto candidates “is just wasting the already finite amount of time that is granted” at each debate for Americans to learn the candidates’ stance on real issues. According to lawnewz.com, the first rule of the first presidential debate is that all questions discussed “will fall under one of the the following categories America’s Direction, Achieving Prosperity, and Securing America.” Discussing Alicia Machado does not come close to one of these three categories and is a prime example of how the first debate failed to inform the American people about relevant topics.
Another topic that has distracted the American people from normal presidential topics is the 2005 Trump and Billy Bush interview. Both made crude and sexual remarks regarding women, without realizing the microphones were on. Despite the harsh and vulgar comments made by Trump, this issue was only brought up at the very beginning of the debate. Due to the precedent already set by previous debates, Trump had to respond with an offensive attack. In this case he attacked Bill Clinton’s 20 year old rape scandals. While it is understandable to bring up the trending news topic of Trump’s vulgar recordings, the entire argument took roughly 15–20 minutes of the already limited 90 minutes designated for policy discussion. The topic was irrelevant and failed to provide undecided voters with each candidate’s stance on specific policy concerns.
Significant erosion of the Presidential race, specifically the rationale for hosting such discussions, is negatively impacting the American people. According to New Press, experts say that undecided voters “might not be questioning who to vote for, but whether or not to vote at all.” Although election day just hours away, and it is already too late to fix the problems of non-policy issues clouding issues that are actually relevant to the American people, it is an opportunity for growth. The people and executives who will run the next presidential debates can, and should, use these past debates as a reference of what not to do when conducting a presidential debate. The citizens are hopeful that the Presidential debates of 2020 will be ones of substance and policy relevant to the American people.
