Debates Are Overrated, But Still Important

It is only in retrospect that we know how important this day in history was.

The very first Kennedy-Nixon Presidential Debate took place on this date in 1960. The incredible influence of the visual medium of television was first demonstrated—and dramatically at that.

Regardless of the content of their responses, the national audience was exposed to the far more impactful NON-VERBAL communication from the candidates. What was the turning point in presidential politics may not have even been in the thought process of then Vice President Richard Nixon and his team.

Namely, that pictures-images DO matter. Consider the mistakes made:

1) Nixon refused to wear makeup. Uninitiated in the effects of the TV lights on human complexion, he was unwilling to be made up. The effect? John F. Kennedy looked tanned and healthy. Nixon looked pale, pasty and ill. Further, the hot lights caused him to sweat.

2) No apparent effort was made to address the posture of the Republican candidate. While Kennedy largely looked relaxed and comfortable, Nixon appeared nervous and ill-at-ease.

Did these things matter?

Absolutely.

What was for many the very first national exposure to the challenger Kennedy, his team was well aware that Kennedy’s mission was to appear “Presidential”, essentially refuting the charges from the Nixon campaign that the Democratic nominee was young and inexperienced.

Here is the original Kennedy-Nixon debate. Watch it and decide for yourself!



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbrcRKqLSRw

Fast-forward to 2011 and the recent Republican debates. Despite the huge excitement from the conservative base over the entrance of Texas Governor Rick Perry into the race, it is abundantly clear that Mr. Perry’s very candidacy is starting to crumble---due to his debate performance---or lack thereof.

Republican consultant Mike Murphy said of Perry: “Listening to Perry try to put a complicated policy sentence together…is like watching a chimp play with a locked suitcase”

Funny, but true.

Brit Hume said that Perry “threw up all over himself” in the last debate. As a result of this and other assessments, Perry’s fundraising has been hit and Herman Cain (in my view the very best performer so far in the debates)—actually won the Florida Straw Poll with 37% of the vote—compared to 15% for Perry and 14% for Romney.

While pundits call this a vote for “none of the above”, perhaps Cain shouldn’t be so roundly dismissed. So far, Cain is the only one who has spoken plainly, directly and with a genuine sense of humor. You get the feeling that (unlike the other candidates), he doesn’t have an arsenal of verbal “gotcha!” comebacks or one-liners ready for delivery. Maybe he does—I wouldn’t blame him. It just seems as if he is generating it all on the spot.

The TV age has made everyone more adept at on-camera situations, but Rick Perry had better get a lot better—and soon.

Meanwhile, Perry’s team says he is not running for “Debater-In-Chief”, but “Commander-In-Chief”. While this may be true, the ability to communicate has never been more important. That deer-in-the-headlights look we routinely got from George W. Bush cannot possibly cut it any longer. President Obama’s detractors will cite his ability to speak as his ONLY attribute.

While I dispute that notion, it is true that his ability to communicate, motivate and explain may have been the deciding factor in his win over the verbal bumbling of John McCain.

The debates do matter. The ability to think on your feet, to articulate ideas and simplify complex issues will be central to the skill set of any President. If the Republicans aren’t on their game, it may dictate the outcome in 2012, just as it did in 2008----and 1960.

Richard Nixon, were he here, would agree.


If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@cumulus.com