TV Debates 

The History of TV debates   

First and possibly still the most famous American presidential debate pitted the telegenic Democrat John F Kennedy against Republican vice-president Richard Nixon. The clammy Nixon was recovering from illness and had a five o’clock shadow but refused makeup. TV viewers are said to have judged Kennedy the winner, whereas radio listeners gave it to Nixon or called it a draw. Kennedy won a narrow election. 

Biden generally did badly-but his rivals did not do enough to replace him as the 'safe choice ' against Trump.



The invisible primary gets its name from the idea that most of it happens out of sight ie fund raising, party endorsements, trips to the early primary states to take part in state fairs and staw polls- but in recent elections TV debates between the candidates have become much more visible.  Between 6 August 2015 and voting beginning in February 2016, there were seven televised debates between the would-be Republican candidates. This was a significant decrease on the 16 such debates held during 2011. It was in the tenth of those 2011 debates that Governor Rick Perry of Texas had a much- publicised memory loss Perry ended his 2012 presidential bid, having finished sixth in the New Hampshire primary with less than 1% of the vote.

In 2016 there was such a large field of candidates they were held in two sessions- but were soon turned into a political circus by Trump whose aggressive style and outrageous remarks captured all the headlines. 

In 2020 only the Democrats had primary debates On evenings of 26th and 27th June,  2019  20 presidential hopefuls walked on stage and attempted  to sell themselves as the one Democratic candidate to take on Donald Trump in the 2020 US presidential election. 



Although debates change few minds- they can be disaster for a candidate who looks like an idiot.

The first 2020 presidential debate did not go well for Donald Trump. Viewers were turned off by the president’s constant hectoring of Joe Biden. And many were alarmed when he not only declined to denounce white supremacists but went so far as to tell a far-right neofascist group to “stand by.” Polling by FiveThirtyEight revealed that 50 percent of people who watched the event rated Trump’s performance as “very poor.”  However, the impact was mostly to confirm people in their views of Trump and Biden.


Some people believe that presidential debates focus more on style than meaningful discussion, promoting quick, attention-grabbing statements rather than real engagement. For instance, in the 2012 presidential debate, Romney was deemed the winner mainly due to his energetic performance, while Obama was criticized for being lackluster. In 2016, Hillary was thought to have outperformed Trump in all three debates, yet she was labeled as dull and humorless, which hindered her ability to defeat an opponent who seemed easy to challenge. Trump's controversial comments, such as stating that not paying taxes made him 'smart' or calling Hillary a 'nasty woman,' actually garnered him more media attention. During the second debate, the focus shifted to Ken Bone, a participant who became a sensation, diverting attention from the candidates' messages.

The primary debates in 2015-2016 gained importance as Trump used them to position himself against traditional politicians, portraying himself as an outsider. His provocative comments captured the media's interest, demonstrating Oscar Wilde's idea that being talked about is better than being ignored. This strategy allowed him to overshadow his more subdued opponents. Bernie Sanders similarly highlighted Hillary's cautiousness with his passionate approach, establishing a contrast that carried into the general election.

While presidential debate outcomes rarely change campaign dynamics, there are exceptions. Reagan effectively used debates to challenge President Carter’s record in 1980 and address concerns about his age in 1984. Noteworthy blunders often gain legendary status but may not significantly influence voters unless they reinforce a pre-existing negative image.





The Biden campaign said the president had a cold to explain why he sounded so hoarse and weak. But Biden’s stumbles right from the beginning played into his biggest vulnerability — his age and whether the 81-year-old is up to the challenge of handling four more years in office.

There were issues for Trump, too, as he continued to spread falsehoods and bathe in the kinds of conspiratorial grievances that have turned off many voters.

However, this debate led to Joe Biden's exit from the race. This contradicts the generally held view that debates don't change much.

Why: Simply put people knew Trump would lie and be odd but Biden's frailty was demonstrated in a manner which shocked even his supporters.

in the second presidential debate of 2024 Harris put Trump on the defensive, taunting him about the size of his crowds and pressing him over his shifting positions on abortion. It clearly rattled the former president, who took the bait again and again. 


·    Presidential debates can be important in encouraging the turnout of the party faithful or turning passive supporters into active voters, as was the case with Kerry in 2004 when Gallup polling showed he closed the 8% gap on President Bush following the debates.

·      Viewing figures vary a great deal but there is a generally declining audience. By 2008 this had fallen to around 50 million, although over 73 million tuned into the vice-presidential debate. 2016 saw a rise to an average of over 70 million and millions more watched on social media.



So  do debates  matter?

In 2019, Vincent Pons, an associate professor at Harvard Business School, and graduate student Caroline Le Pennec from the University of California, Berkeley, released a working paper examining the impact of 56 TV debates on 31 elections in the U.S. and U.K. Their research revealed that these debates did not assist undecided voters in making choices or lead those with established preferences to change their candidates. Pons expressed surprise at this outcome, noting the high viewership and media attention that debates typically receive. Jay Van Bavel, an associate professor of psychology and neural science at New York University, pointed out that most viewers do not watch debates to be persuaded but to see how their chosen candidate performs against the opponent. Additionally, evidence suggests that viewers often interpret debate events in a way that aligns with their existing beliefs and identities. In a recent study, Van Bavel found that individuals from different political parties focused on and remembered different aspects of a 2016 debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. He stated that when partisans watch a debate, they tend to reinforce their pre-existing opinions.