Presidential debates are a tradition worth preserving, so bring on Harris-Trump

Will they do it or will they not do it?

By the time this editorial goes to press, the September 10 debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump could be canceled again, given the back-and-forth of the past few days over muted microphones and other issues.

But as we write these lines, both presidential candidates have already decided to face each other in Philadelphia.

“I have made an agreement with the radical left Democrats for a debate with Comrade Kamala Harris,” the Republican candidate wrote last Tuesday in his typically blunt manner on his Truth Social platform. “It will be broadcast live on ABC FAKE NEWS, by far the meanest and most unfair news anchor in the business…”

Trump’s views on journalism and hard facts do not matter. Nor does it matter whether or not the microphones are muted when it is not a candidate’s turn to speak (according to the latest reports, the microphones are muted, while the Harris team reportedly prefers hot mics). The main goal is to get the two together in one place at least once so Americans can learn more about how they would address the substantive issues facing the country.

Polls have consistently shown that Americans’ biggest concerns this election season are the economy and immigration. Other issues on voters’ radar include reproductive rights, health care, climate change and the environment, tax cuts, and the U.S. role in foreign conflicts such as the Israel-Hamas war and the war in Ukraine.

Presidential debates have always been designed to inform voters about the candidates’ policy views and help them make better decisions. In that sense, they are a cornerstone of democracy, although many people watch the debates for entertainment and even play drinking games during them.

Although debates often ultimately have little or no impact on the final outcome of the election, voters deserve a chance to compare how the candidates perform under pressure. After all, they are competing for the most important job in the nation, if not the world, and it is crucial to determine whether or not one is fit for the office.

When there are glaring missteps or verbal exchanges, it’s telling. Both could well play a decisive role in deciding a close presidential race. One study found that while debates typically only reinforce the decisions voters have already made, “there also appears to be considerable potential to change citizens’ preferences – especially among those respondents who were undecided or had only weakly decided on one of the candidates.”

A poor performance in a debate can end a political career, or at least put a damper on it. That’s what happened to Richard Nixon after the first of four televised debates between him and John F. Kennedy. “My God, they embalmed him before he even died,” Mayor Richard J. Daley reportedly said of Nixon’s live performance at the 1960 debate taped in Chicago. Nixon, of course, won the 1968 election – when he refused to debate his opponent, Hubert Humphrey.

President Joe Biden’s recent poor performance in the debate laid the groundwork for the pressure campaign that ultimately led to his decision not to run as the Democratic nominee and to pass the baton to Harris, who was the second woman to run for president with a major party.

According to Nielsen Media Research, 84 million viewers watched the first debate of the 2016 presidential election between Trump and Hillary Clinton, the first woman to run as a major party presidential candidate. A record.

Four years later, 73 million people – the third-largest debate audience ever – watched at least part of the Trump-Biden debate.

A healthy debate – not a loud argument – will give Americans a chance to see how quickly the candidates can respond; whether Trump will pull the same antics as in 2016, when he chased Clinton on the debate stage; and whether Harris can do more to introduce herself to voters in a shortened campaign season.

As everyone knows, America is politically polarized. Many voters have already made up their minds. If you are one of them, we urge you to tune in.

Because debates are still a tradition that needs to be maintained.

The Democracy Solutions Project is a collaboration between the Chicago Sun-Times, WBEZ and the University of Chicago’s Center for Effective Government, with funding from the Pulitzer Center. Our goal is to help listeners and readers engage with the democratic functions in their lives and cast an informed vote in the November 2024 election.

Send letters to [email protected]

Get opinion pieces in your inbox. Sign up for our Weekly newsletter here.

The Sun-Times welcomes letters to the editor and opinion pieces. Read our guidelines.

More about the Sun-Times editorial staff at chicago.suntimes.com/about/editorial-board