Jacob Clere has watched all three of this year's presidentialdebates as well as the vice presidential debate.
As the president of the Ball State College Democrats, heencouraged other students to join him at three public viewings hisorganization put on.
"They all had good turnouts," he said, noting that about 65people attended the first debate and 25 came to the vicepresidential debate.
Most students could watch the presidential debates on televisionin their homes, and those who missed a debate likely had a quickplayback within his or her grasp via the Internet or a tapedrecording. With the evolution of technology since the earliest daysof political debating has come changes in the format and even thereasons behind the modern presidential debate.
< B>DEBATE FEVER< B>
The first debates to receive widespread national attention werenot presidential but the seven debates between Abraham Lincoln andStephen Douglas, the candidates for an U.S. senate seat in Illinoisduring the 1858 elections.
"These became popular because they were the first debates inAmerican history to receive national press attention," Brian Dirck,a Lincoln scholar and an assistant professor of history at AndersonUniversity, said.
Lincoln, who was virtually unknown to most of the public at thetime, became a prominent public figure because he took a strongstand against Douglas, a well-known and eloquent speaker whoauthored the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Lincoln opposed the act becauseit would permit expansion of slavery into the westernterritories.
The debates, Dirck said, were a point of entertainment as wellas information for the public.
"Even in pouring rainstorms, thousands of people came out tolisten to them because they enjoyed them," he said, noting thatvoter participation was in the range of 80 to 90 percent ratherthan 40 to 50 percent as it is today. "Politics was like a game toAmericans. They went to these debates to have fun."
< B>THE RULES CHANGE< B>
Unlike today, there were few formal rules in the 19th centurydebates, and the moderator played a minor role in proceedings.Often, the debates were an opportunity for candidates to publiclyspar about issues.
"There were political debates in Lincoln and Douglas's timewhere the candidates got into fistfights," Dirck said. Lincoln orDouglas would start a debate with a speech, then the candidateswould alternate throughout the debate to respond to one another'sspeeches.
Dirck said that people were "horrified" when Al Goreaggressively debated George W. Bush in the 2000 debates.
Television, Dirck said, changed the nature of debates andbrought them back into the eye of the public. The first televiseddebate in 1960 between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon allowedpeople to see the candidates, and many viewers were swayed by theirphysical appearances. Kennedy looked healthy and exuberant incontrast to Nixon, who refused makeup and was pale after a bout ofthe flu.
Afterward, Dirck said, debate organizers desired a morecontrolled environment. The next televised debate in 1976 betweenJimmy Carter and Gerald Ford ushered in the form of the debate aswe know it today. In 1987, the Commission of Presidential Debateswas formed to sponsor debates and organize debates. Today thedebates are negotiated between the parties involved and follow astructured set of specific rules. For example, the candidatescannot bring notes with them to the podium.
Michael Bauer, a professor of communication studies at BallState, said that the reasoning behind modern presidential debateshas changed.
"The debates are really more for presenting ideas than forclashing with ideas," Bauer said. "There's very littlespontaneity."
Bauer noted that today's candidates often have a clear idea ofthe topics that will arise in a debate, though they might not knowthe exact questions. Knowing what they will say beforehand allowscandidates to provide the public with more specific and clearanswers, Bauer said, but he believes a less structured debate wouldhelp Americans perceive how well a candidate thinks quickly andperforms under pressure.
< B>DEBATE INFLUENCE< B>
Dirck said he feels that the political debates of the 19thcentury were superior in some ways to modern presidentialdebates.
"They were much more robust. They were much more direct to theissue," he said. "They didn't have this canned, predeterminedformat."
Most viewers of debates today, Bauer said, have already decidedfor whom they will vote and watch to both reinforce their opinionsof their chosen candidate and deny those of the opposition.
"For the most part, it's a pretty small percentage of peoplethat use the debates to actually make a decision on who they'regoing to vote for," Bauer said.
Even so, Clere said he feels it is important for students towatch the debates so they can hear the candidates themselves speakrather than depend upon their representatives and the press.
"Things get distorted," he said. "It's good to hear it directlyfrom their mouths."
Clere said he understands that some students might not have highinterest in politics, but he feels they should still know about thestands of presidential candidates.
"They have to care," he said. "Politics affects us all. Itaffects us both directly and indirectly who is in the WhiteHouse."
Read More
Three Air Jam teams take home the win
October 12, 2012Nineteen teams shimmied, shook and flipped for a sold out John R. Emens Auditorium on Thursday night during the 25th annual Air Jam.
Bill Clinton Speaks at North Central High School
October 12, 2012Former President's Speech Could Have Effect on State Senate Race
