Debates and Communication

As I write this, the 2012 presidential campaign is only weeks away from coming to a crashing end. It has been quite volatile with the candidates verbally blasting away at each other with an intensity we have not seen in years. Presently, we have had two debates between the presidential candidates and one between the vice presidential candidates. (Currently, there is one more presidential debate to go.) While I have found each of the face-to-face confrontations between the various candidates to be quite interesting, I have also been struck at what I call the communication posturing that has occurred and the apparent impact it has had on American voters. 

To begin, in these kind of settings candidates have the challenge of communicating effectively with several different audiences: their opponent, the moderator, in-person audience members, and with the millions of citizens who are tuned in either via television, radio or the Internet. Under any circumstance, communicating with such diverse publics is difficult. Regardless of the specific strategies one uses - and thus far we have seen smiling, laughing, ignoring, interrupting - they have not worked with each intended public because each public has their own bias. For instance, Democrat supporters were not turned off by Vice President Joe Biden's constant smiling in response to what Congressman Paul Ryan was saying while Republican supporters were. 

Audience attitude has been a key factor in the debates. My sense is a heavy majority of people have tuned in to the events to have their pre-determined perspectives be validated rather than gain new information. Thus, what the candidate has said and will say has made and will make little difference in altering how prospective voters ultimately vote.  This, generally, means debates are not necessarily all that risky unless a candidate says or does something totally dumb or inappropriate. That, in my view, has not happened and is not likely to. Still, presidential debates remain highly fascinating and do contribute greatly to our imperfect election process.