EDITORIALS : Welcome to the dance
Posted on Saturday, October 4, 2008
WHEN IS a debate not a debate ?
When it’s televised,
mediaumpired, poll-monitored and endlessly second-guessed. It’s less a debate than a minor spectator sport. The rules of formal debate, with its scorecard of categories to judge, don’t apply. This is more of a dance, a ritual, a combination quiz show, beauty pageant and sparring match in which courtesies are exchanged and talking points repeated as if they were actual thoughts. A whole nation looks on, waiting for the clouds of rhetoric to part and give us, as they inevitably and unfortunately say, A Defining Moment. It’s got to be there somewhere, we tell ourselves, like a pin in a cliché-stack.
This whole performance has its own rules, and the debater—we almost said contestant—who wins is the one who breaks through them long enough to give the proceedings a touch of reality. That is, the one who is himself—or herself. And puts a human face on politics. Which is no small challenge. How best meet it ? By discarding the old rules of debate we learned in high school, those of us even then of hopelessly rhetorical bent, and recognizing that political debate is a branch of drama, of theater, of showbiz. As the great modern presidents—one thinks of Franklin Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan—well understood.
THE GREAT communicators
follow a different set of rules
instinctively, without having to enumerate them. Maybe because they are blessed with charm. The pedestrian rest of us have to reason our way to what the naturals intuit. Having suffered through more hours of political debate than is good for either mind or body, or soul, here are five simple—maybe too simple—rules we’d suggest to any aspiring political debater. Or even to practiced ones still laboring under the delusion that debate and political debate are synonymous terms: 1. Be happy to be there, be honored to be there. This is not a another grueling chore you’ve got to get through before moving on to the next stop on your schedule, the next appointment in your book. The winner approaches a debate the way most of us do a party. Like a party, a debate may take some preparing, but isn’t that part of the fun ? Remember that a good debate, like a good time, is a break with the mundane chores of life. A real talk with real friends. Not something to be endured but enjoyed. The winner looks forward to a friendly, even intimate, conversation. The loser looks at his watch and just wants it to be over.
2. Know thyself. (We know that’s not an original rule. ) Don’t reduce that most valuable core of who you are to a practiced show. Let it shine in what you say, how you act and speak and move. People will forgive the little slips and stutters that mark real conversation, or not even notice them; it’s the rote pretense and empty garble-and-gabble of politics that drives so many of us to tune out, and think of political rhetoric as nothing but the static of life. In the course of debating the issues, think yourself back to yourself, and carry your listeners with you. Pauses help. They concentrate the mind and concentrate the attention of those listening. And watching. When your opponent tries to give you the runaround, don’t let him. Pin him down. For example, if you happen to find yourself up against somebody who’s for war but not really, kindly ask for an explanation. (“ You’re one who says, as so many politicians do, I was for it before I was against it or vice-versa. Americans are craving that straight talk and just want to know, hey, if you voted for it, tell us why you voted for it—and it was a war resolution. ” )
3. Be unrehearsed even if you have to rehearse it. If that sounds like Zen, it is. Know your subject so well you can clear your mind of all the baggage that gets in the way of the essential. Clear your mind. So you can get back to first principles. Speak plain. Don’t be afraid to say what you’re thinking. (“ It’s so obvious that I’m a Washington outsider and I’m someone who’s just not used to the way you guys operate. ” )
4. For goodness sake, don’t think you have to answer the question. Rise above it. The object is to raise the level of public discourse, not let others confine you to their limited idea of it. The way a question is framed can assure the answer the questioner wants, or even put you in a defensive crouch. Don’t play that game. Nobody nominated the moderator to be vice president of the United States; why let him—or her in Thursday night’s case—set the agenda ? You’ve got your own to propose. Direct your answers to the voters; they’re the ones you’re accountable to—not the moderator and certainly not your opponent. (“ I may not answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to hear, but I’m going to talk straight to the American people.... ” )
5. Talk to the future, to the next generation. Your greater object isn’t to win the debate, or even the election. There will be other debates, other elections. A great debate is about winning the future. Ronald Reagan didn’t win his party’s presidential nomination in 1976; he won the next decade. This is a forward-looking, practical, always westering country. At our best We the People aren’t interested in fighting the problem but solving it. A great debater doesn’t argue facts; we have factcheckers for that. A great debater argues great ideas. See Lincoln, A. in his encounters with the sleekest senator of his time who was supposed to be the greatest orator in the country. Does anyone remember anything Stephen A. Douglas said on those occasions ? Can anyone forget that a house divided against itself cannot stand ? Mr. Lincoln, let it be noted, lost that election to the U. S. Senate; he won only the future.
One can judge a political debate in any number of ways. A glib rhetorician and sharp operator can walk away from a debate convinced he won every exchange, yet slowly beginning to realize he’s lost the match, and if he’s truly talentless, he’ll have no idea why. Using these five tests, there’s no doubt in our mind who won this vice presidential debate, any more than there is about which candidate the American people were really interested in hearing from Thursday night, and which caught and then held our attention. Gentle Reader may differ, and we happily grant that it’s a debatable question.
FEEDBACK:
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online