Presidential Debates Between McCain and Obama Will Have Extra Importance
With no sitting president or vice president on the November ballot since 1952, this will be an extraordinary year in the run for the White House.
It underscores the importance of the three presidential debates and one vice presidential debate in September and October. Since many voters, surprisingly enough, don't focus on the election until Labor Day, it makes these encounters more important than ever.
The campaigns of Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama should agree soon on holding these debates without any prolonged discussion. In the past, there have been debates over the debates, often for silly reasons.
The Commission on Presidential Debates, chaired by former party Chairmen Paul Kirk (Democrat) and Frank Fahrenkopf (Republican), knows the ropes on arranging the debates. It is no easy matter of logistics, with the interest of the campaigns, the Secret Service, the press, and a myriad of details over arrangements.
As in the recent debates, there will be a single moderator with no panel of reporters to allow the candidates more time to deliver their rehearsed sound bites.
The candidates will not be discouraged from confronting each other if the opportunity arises. It should, with the gulf of differences on issues between Obama and McCain.
The commission expects to be sued by fringe candidates who do not hit the 15 percent threshold in the major polls to qualify for the debates. Ralph Nader is sure to sue as he has in the past, and Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate, may, too. The lawsuits will be tossed out, as they should be.
The choice of moderators is made by the commission. In the past, PBS's Jim Lehrer of the News Hour has been the ideal moderator. He is fair, has a sense of humor, and is not given to "gotcha" questions. Most important, his TV background always brings a minimum of any nervous jitters.
(Full disclosure: Lehrer has been a friend for many years since both of us started as reporters in Dallas longer ago than we like to admit.)
One idea for this year: The press should insist that the so-called spinners for the candidates be kept out of the newsroom while reporters file their stories. Let the spinners, who always claim their candidate won with ease, set up shop in another room or locale.
All considered, these debates could determine which candidate takes the oath of office next January 20.
Tags: debates | presidential election 2008 | Barack Obama | John McCain
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (17) | Print
Reader Comments
Presidential "debates" legality
The Commission on Federal Debates is a fraud and as un-American as rotten apple pie.
Presidential elections are determined by the Electoral College, which is 100 percent associated with state electoral policies. Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney are all LEGALLY on the Colorado State ballot---they have met the criteria needed to qualify for our state election and therefore they must be included in the presidential debates, the 15 percent "rule" (which has no legal meaning) be damned. If they qualify to be on the ballot, they have the legal right to be heard regardless of polls, all of which are generated by the private sector and its foundation affiliates.
Who is this creep who writes that any lawsuits filed by other candidates should be thrown out? Best that USN&WR throw him out of his job for writing such garbage----Rupert Murdoch is looking for a few good men like him.
CPD IS WRONG
This country is getting more and more screwed up the older we get. The CPD is a complete disgrace to every eligible voter out there. These candidate's judgement are not tested (sadly enough) until they are actually in The White House. The CPD Commission of Politcal Debates is a Two Party Committee; therefore, they do everything they can to keep anybody else out of the debates. They consider themselves "Non-Partisan", but one look at who they consist of and there is only Republican and Democrats on the board. I STRONGLY URGE ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS TO READ NO DEBATE BY GEORGE FARAH!!!!! This is a true eye opener to the entire debate system. We were born a Republic....Now we are called a Democracy....But I'm starting to wonder if we are either of those! Stand up and question your Representatives about these issues!
other candidates should be allowed to dabate
It is wrong not to let other pandidates into the dabates if they are on the ballot in enough atates to win the electorial vote. The reason we aren't hearing anything about real issues like illegal immigration and amnesty or the roll of the Federal Reserve and the over use of executive orders and many others is because there is little difference between the tow major parties and they have an agreement not to discuss these issues because it would hurt both parties.
We supposedly have a representative republic form of government. Why then are the minor candidates not allowed to debate? It is because there is little difference between the two parties and they don't want this threatened by independents. This is an outrage and had better be changed.
advertisement
John W. Mashek covered politics in Washington for four decades with U.S. News & World Report, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and the Boston Globe. His primary beats were Congress, the White House, and national politics. He covered every presidential election from 1960 to 1996. He was a panelist in three televised presidential debates in 1984, 1988, and 1992.