Why Presidential debates help determine the outcome of an election?

Answer 1

Presidential debates originally were created to give the candidates a chance to show off their ability as speakers as well as their ability to answer difficult questions or refute their opponent's beliefs. Unlike today, these were actual debates, and they might take hours. While the famous Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858 were for the senate, rather than the presidency, the oratory and public speaking skills required were typical of what the public expected. Some sources say those two men debated for as long as eight hours, and the crowds were fascinated (and impressed).

In the radio age, beginning in the 1920s, presidential debates became faster and more concise, since it was believed that the listening audience would not sit through hours and hours of debating. And by the television era, when how the candidate looked was as important as how the candidate sounded, debates became even more about entertainment as well as about showing how well the candidate could handle a difficult question.

In a world where image is everything, presidential debates can often make or break a candidate. Critics have pointed out many times that these debates are often short on substance, and mainly show how well the candidate has mastered the art of being comfortable for the television audience. And yet, for all their flaws, these debates can give the public an impression of a candidate that often leads to a positive or negative perception of that person's ability. Many historians believe the Kennedy-Nixon debate of 1960 won Kennedy the presidency, since Kennedy was far more appealing and confident on TV than Nixon was. (The reasons why Nixon was uncomfortable on TV were not known to the viewers, who had no idea he had been ill, nor that he was far more at ease on radio than on the new medium of television. They just knew that Kennedy seemed vibrant and youthful, while Nixon seemed awkward and ill-at-ease. Radio listeners were not distracted by how Nixon looked, and many thought he was the better debater, but the viewers felt entirely the opposite.)

Similarly, during the 2000 election, many viewers felt George W. Bush seemed far more of a "regular guy" than his opponent, Al Gore, who was perceived as stiff and formal. Bush won the election even though some critics believed Gore was the better debater. Again, these impressions may seem superficial, but they do seem to matter to the voters, and demonstrate how presidential debates can influence what the voters decide to do.

Answer 2

Presidential debates offer a platform for candidates to present their ideas, policies, and leadership qualities directly to the public. They allow voters to assess the candidates' knowledge, communication skills, and ability to handle pressure, which can influence their decision at the ballot box. Additionally, debates attract significant media coverage, reaching a wide audience and shaping public opinion, ultimately playing a crucial role in determining the outcome of an election.