Presidential Debates Won't Hurt Bush

Presidential debates do not make or break presidents. Their importance is vastly overblown by politicians and the public. Debates are mostly photo-ops and glamor contests. The Kerry-Bush debates won't hurt Bush no matter how he performs.

(PRWEB) September 30, 2004 -- To prepare for their presidential debates, President Bush and Democratic presidential contender John Kerry will spend small fortunes on legions of media consultants, debate coaches, and make-up and hair stylists. They will prep themselves on when to smile, laugh, how to dress, and what joke lines to deliver. They will study every detail of camera lighting, shots, and angles. But none of this will ultimately determine which of them wins the White House. Thats because pollsters, politicians, and much of the public have vastly overblown the importance of Presidential debates.

Despite the belief of politicians, and the public, says political analyst Earl Ofari Hutchinson, Its a myth that presidential debates make or break presidents." Hutchinson examines past presidential debates involving Ford and Carter, Reagan and Carter, Bush Sr. and Dukakis, Bush Sr. and Clinton, and Bush Jr. and Gore. He shows how and why they were far less important in determining the final outcome of their presidential races than is commonly asserted.

Experts also question how much influence presidential debates really have on voters. One study has found that voters say that the debates did not persuade or dissuade them from voting for a particular candidate. The study also found that voters felt that presidential contenders do not focus on the issues during the debate, and that they had not learned anything new from watching the debates. "Debates then essentially are giant personality contests and photo-op sessions," says Hutchinson, "That do not inform or educate the public on crucial public policy issues."
###