“Debate – de·bate [dih-beyt], noun: a formal contest in which the affirmative and negative sides of a proposition are advocated by opposing speakers.”
“The presidential debate symbolizes democratic transparency. There you will see [a candidate’s] attitude… [and] what are their true qualities.”
― Rafael Olivero
There have been two US presidential political debates, with a third to come, and only 28 days to the election.
In toto, they haven’t given us much real debate about the details and merits of each candidate’s agenda.
Maybe we shouldn’t call them debates, they’re more like interviews. Let’s just call them Meet The Candidate.
Actually, this campaign season has been like watching The Jerry Springer Show on tv.
There is nothing to be said that will sway the partisans from their ideological choice, their minds were made up once the nominations were settled.
But it’s a shame that those who are not endeared to either of their parties (and don’t want to waste their vote by not voting or voting for a third party candidate who has no chance of winning), and are undecided, have only been given sound-bites, accusations of extraneous personal wrong doings and denials, and not much of detailed substance upon which to make an intelligent choice as to which should be president – and commander-in-chief of our military with his/her finger on the bomb.
On second thought, maybe there has.
We’ve been given an insight into each candidate’s attitudes and – one must assume – their true inner qualities.
And, in this election, the differences couldn’t be more pronounced.
That might be more important than policy details – more telling one could say, of the person behind the face the rest of the world will see as America.