If you watched last night’s Democratic primary debate and walked away perplexed, you’re not alone. The candidates provided more clickbait-fodder than substance, and more posture than honesty. But then again, that’s exactly what presidential debates are for: entertainment, not information.
Ostensibly, election debates are a chance for candidates to explain and defend their positions and attract voters. In a primary debate, the objective is more muddled. Candidates must present coherent platforms, endorse certain policies, and convince voters that their proposals are better than the others’.
But policy is only half the game. And it is, in fact, a game. The other half is personality, and if recent history is any indication, it’s this that wins elections. Hence, Donald Trump, the reality TV star who carried the 2016 election on the back of his dominating demeanor.
The Democratic candidates tried their hand at Trump’s tactic last night, and the result was uncomfortable, to say the least. In a crowded field that lacks any candidate with real show appeal, the 2020 hopefuls jostled for attention and attempted to stand out in an awkward display of pandering. Beto O’Rourke began speaking in Spanish, but Sen. Cory Booker was not to be bested and quickly followed suit. New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, who is white, touted his racial appeal by referencing his adopted African American son. Again, Booker, not to be out-diversified, chimed in and reasserted his minority status.
When asked pointed policy questions, most — if not all — of the candidates dodged questions and reverted to prepared talking points that would make them look favorable.
None of these moments were wrong in and of themselves. It’s impressive that presidential candidates can appeal to those who speak different languages, and it’s necessary and good to see other ethnicities represented on the debate stage. But these kinds of moments dominated the two-hour event and its proceeding coverage, leaving little room for substantive conversation.
Of course, that’s exactly what the candidates and viewers expected, because it works. Inflammatory comments aren’t aimless; they serve a purpose. They grab headlines and leave a lasting impact, more so than specific policy points. That’s why Rep. Tulsi Gabbard walked away from the first debate in a strong position and rose to the top of Drudge Report’s instant poll. Her pro-Assad stance might be unpopular, but it’s different, and thus, entertaining (though I doubt that was her intention).
This should be a cause for concern. After all, politics and the policies that shape it should be much more than a source of entertainment. But sensation sells, thanks to social media and immediate access to information via the Internet. After last night, this reality doesn’t bode well for the Democratic candidates: If it’s the entertainment game we’re playing, Trump wins every time.
