Swinging away at the debates

Before Nov. 8, there are three other important dates for the two major candidates: Sept. 26, Oct. 4 and Oct. 9; these constitute the rapid succession of presidential debates.

Though it might seem counterintuitive, presidential debates have not had much of an impact on elections, as shown through an extensive study conducted by political scientists Robert Erikson and Christopher Wlezien. Yet, in such a non-conventional election it is hard to say if this precedent will be followed. The sheer amount of undecided voters towers above those in the last few elections. A staggering number of these undecided voters come from voters age-35 and under, evident from a recent poll that showed one in five in this category would not vote for either candidate.

The reason for this could be attributed to the record-high unfavorability ratings for both candidates, which comes alongside the plethora of personal problems and scandals these candidates have had to endure. These two candidates differ fundamentally on just about every issue, so it’s likely that personal and not policy views are driving the indecision and resentment toward the candidates. In such an emotionally-driven campaign cycle it’s within reason to conclude that the upcoming presidential debates, the first of which is less than a week away, might actually sway voters to action.

Another indicator as to why these upcoming debates could play such a decisive role in the election is the huge variability in polling. An average of national polls showed at the end of July that Trump held a one-point lead. By late August this average became a six-point Clinton lead, but now the lead has again tightened up to a virtual tie, with Clinton holding a slim one-point lead. This kind of fluctuation amongst the polls is a testament to the restlessness among the American public. The next national headline is just one Freudian slip away and can bring with it terrible or fantastic media coverage, evidenced in Trump’s going after a Gold Star family, or Clinton’s calling of half of Trump’s supporters a “basket of deplorables.” Though the debates have recently not held as much power as they did in the Kennedy-Nixon election, they still attract massive viewership. With every line needing to be crisp, every argument under the watchful eyes of the public and the media, one missed point at the debate could spell disaster at the polls.

The candidates have very different messages that they must get across over the course of the debate. However, we might be in for a circus. A Gallup survey suggests that due to the unseen nature of both candidates high unfavorability ratings, both candidates are poised to use personal attacks to best deliver their political punches. It’s unlikely that Clinton or Trump can salvage their own reputation, so the plan for both looks to be to cast the other in a worse light.

On the debate stage, Trump will look to cash in on voters’ lack of trust in Clinton by repeatedly hitting her on her various scandals, the emails, Benghazi, pneumonia. On the other side, Clinton will look to paint Trump as con-man, pressing Trump’s business record and his inability to elucidate his platform. It will be tempting, though not perhaps best, for each side to simply fire away at each other’s flaws.

A debate sufficient with personal attacks would seem to favor Trump, as made clear with his bullying campaign in the Republican debates. Thus, Clinton should focus on what she knows best: policy. If Clinton can manage to keep the debate clean and focused on the issues, Trump might find himself hard-pressed to keep up, as he has shown reluctance to giving detailed policy. Regardless of how the debate turns out one thing is for sure: undecided voters will be tuned in, possibly ready to swing this election in either direction.

Noah Davis is a Trinity sophomore. His column, “pretty average,” runs on alternate Tuesdays.