Jottings - Slice of life - 419 ( few thoughts on the Presidential debate, and a backward glance at one of the greatest debates in American history)

The American Presidential debates is a wonderful democratic process. It gives the people an opportunity to witness prospective leaders to articulate their thoughts and vision for the country. While the electioneering campaigns and propagandizing pulpits that precede the elections are often about framing the political stand of the respective parties and glamorizing their nominee; the presidential debates themselves, held during the last weeks leading up to the election, holds a truer mirror to how the candidates feel about sensitive issues, and how they respond to each other on important national and international priorities. Standing alone on that big stage under the glare of spotlights, for three nights staggered over few weeks, facing each other, and addressing an audience — both live and television — that can run into hundreds of millions, the presidential nominees are expected to answer and rebut spontaneously, with wit and grace if possible, but always with intellectual rigor and emotional poise. It is debatable if the debates themselves sway the elections in any way, but there is no doubt it reflects the true caliber of the leaders aspiring to occupy the white house. The hour and a half of intellectual and moral display can provide a peek into the soul of the man who will hold the destiny of the American people, and that of the free world, for the next four years.

The first such televised Presidential debate was held in 1960 between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon( available on Youtube). At that time, there were no formal debate commissions which regulated the format and quality. The rules were mutually agreed upon between the two nominees. JFK was a natural orator, had a flair for words, and an incredibly charming public demeanor; Nixon, on the other hand, was a shrewd political strategist, stressed, restless, and shy of the public stage. There was no doubt in anybody’s mind which way the first public debate would go. As expected, JFK soared high with his matchless rhetoric and effortless poise. But, interestingly, Nixon came back strong in the next two debates. And history records, on the 8th of November 1960, the day the results were announced, JFK won the presidency by less than one percent margin to lead American into its youthful resurrection for the next eight years. There was a break of eight years from 1968 to 1976 when Nixon refused to debate, and then from 1976 onwards, quadrennially, the spectacle of two presidential nominees, verbally clashing with each other on stage has become a national rite, a crescendo in the election campaign, and a barometer to check which of the two candidates, individually, without the support and help of the party machinery, is able to clearly articulate their political stand and moral positions for the future of America. The candidates are usually unaware of the questions and are expected to be well educated on the facts and policies endorsed by their respective parties. The candidates are also expected to frame their answers in an intelligible manner for the common man, and at the same time maintain a high quality of rhetoric. It is demanding exercise, no doubt, and not all the debates across the ten-odd elections since 1978 have had substance, style or erudition expected of this encounters; but, it can be said of most debates, that the nominees at least had the courtesy to allow each other to speak their mind for the allotted mind followed by a sane exchange of ideas and polite jabs between themselves. In the 2020 debate, however, even these basic elements were missing. I am not in support of any candidate at this time. I wish both the nominees all the very best in their campaigns. My only prayer is that the elected leader can keep the flame of the free world and the democratic values it enshrines, bright, and secure. This year has been difficult for all nations, more so, the USA. America more than ever needs resolute, clear, and embracing leadership, and if last week’s debate is anything to go by, it failed to indicate in any certain manner who has a better vision for the country. I am sure the candidates have an agenda, but the heated emotions of the occasion subverted the rationale and purpose of a debate.

It is an incorrect assumption that debates at the national stage must have winners and losers. It can be so at a college-level competition, but even there, winners and losers are graded and declared on debating skills and not so much on the substance of the arguments. In one of the greatest and widely acclaimed debates in American history, the better debater and orator actually lost. I am referring to the Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858. In the summer of the momentous year, when the question of slavery was assuming great importance and the nation was perilously close to disunion, two men fought for a senate seat in the state of Chicago: Abraham Lincoln, a forty-nine year old republican who believed that all men were born equal and were vocal about abolition; and Frederick Douglas, the seasoned democrat, two-term incumbent, anti-abolitionist who believed the white man was designed to rule. There could not have two more contradictory positions at that time. Both of them were brilliant orators, and their individual speeches across the state drew massive crowds. Wherever Douglas spoke, Lincoln occupied the same podium a few hours later rebutting or responding to Douglas’s arguments. Newspapers began to characterize Lincoln’s approach as “defensive” since he always seems to be responding to Douglas. In July, pushed by the pressure from the newspapers, and Lincoln’s own sense that he was trailing behind Douglas, he mooted the idea of addressing the crowds together to Douglas. This was what the Paper’s called the “western-style” of doing things — where two men would settle their differences face to face with a quick draw. Douglas wasn’t very keen on this idea. After all, he was the current incumbent and more established than Lincoln. Therefore sharing the same podium with him is equivalent to granting him an equal chance. But again, in the true western tradition, a challenge cannot go unanswered, and Douglas reluctantly accepted the idea but insisted that he choose the venues. Lincoln was fine, and it fell upon him to propose the format of the debate, which he carefully orchestrated. Each debate would last three hours. The first speaker gets one hour, followed by the second speaker who gets an hour and a half to respond, and the last segment of half an hour would come back to the first speaker to deliver any concluding rejoinders. Over seven debates, Lincoln and Douglas would speak first in rotation to avoid undue advantage to either one of them.

Never before and never after have political debates assumed such importance or popularity in the public mind as the Lincoln-Douglas debates. The tall, lanky Lincoln and the short cocky Douglas, set the stage on fire. The seven debates became a national spectacle. People traveled from all over the country, set up tents, booked into hotels, and created a carnival atmosphere. Partisan newspapers from both sides covered each debate verbatim ( at least they tried). The crowds “booed” and “cheered” with the rise and ebb of inspired oratory. Both men sweating and tired in the sweltering summer of the midwest realized the gravity of their speeches and rose to the occasion. They transformed every debate into a discussion on the foundational principles of the nation. They were not merely debating, but educating a young nation on how to make judicious and wise choices. Neither Lincoln nor Douglas needed notes to refer to, gifted as they were with a prodigious memory, wide learning, and laser-sharp intellect. The debates were printed and distributed widely across the country molding the sentiment and proclivities of a nation still finding a way to reconcile freedom and slavery, black and white.

Lincoln lost the senate seat to Douglas, but a few years later, on March 4th, 1861, Lincoln delivered his inaugural speech as President. In a touching moment, as the president walked up the portico, he removed his hat and looked for a place to hang it, when a hand reached out from the chairs - It was Douglas with a smile on his face. He held the hat for the President throughout the speech. That night, in the inaugural ball, the first lady walked into the hall in the arms of Douglas - her first suitor, whom she let go to marry the ambitious and introspective Lincoln. The debates were behind them, and a new era was set into motion in the United States. Tragically, three months into Lincoln’s presidency, Douglas died of a heart attack while doing what he did best — speaking and educating people; but this time, he was speaking to preserve the state of the Union. During his funeral, Lincoln refused to come out of his study, or speak to anyone. He ordered the white house to be draped in black, a mark of respect given to only the choicest members of the republic.

On that day, two of the greatest debaters of the century were silent; one shut in his room, unable to articulate his grief; and the other lying at rest in his grave. Both of them, however, knew that history will never be able to forget their seven encounters between August and October of 1858, as long as the spirit of America lives.