Political debates are a powerful tool that provide opportunities for voters to learn about candidates, understand issues and forecast governance. When conducted well, they foster a better understanding of complex topics and encourage respectful discourse, a goal for any democracy.
When debates first emerged in general elections, voters were often relatively unfamiliar with candidates and their positions, especially in presidential campaigns. But by the time debates arrive, many voters have become quite familiar with the candidates – through their campaign track records, prior public statements and extensive media coverage over months of campaigning.
Despite this, debates still generate interest in the candidates and can shape public perceptions of the candidates. Whether they are held in person, on the radio or television, debates have the potential to influence voters’ choices and the course of policymaking.
However, debates do have some limitations that can hinder their effectiveness. For example, in some debates, moderators impose their own agenda on the discussion, framing questions with little input from the public or other journalists. This can lead to questions that advance news headlines rather than allowing the candidates to explain their plans and position on issues.
Furthermore, the costs associated with hosting a debate can be substantial. Typically, hosting universities construct or retrofit buildings to create a debate venue and build infrastructure for spin alleys, candidate holding rooms, surrogate viewing areas, press filing centers, staff work spaces and ticket distribution. This is expensive, particularly for smaller campaigns that struggle to afford the cost of a national debate.