Given the oddities and irregularities of this presidential campaign cycle, it should come as no surprise that the day following the first debate was characterized by a glaring disconnection between the online polls and the opinions of the pundits. Almost unanimously, CNN being the exception, the online polls considered Donald Trump to be the winner of the debate, and almost unanimously, Bill O’Reilly included, the corporately owned media awarded first place to Hillary Clinton. In an effort to explain this disconnect, the mainstream media has charged that online polls following a debate are biased and unreliable. That may be true. Unfortunately, the pundits of the mainstream media are equally biased and unreliable. Consider the New York Times, for instance. This pro-Clinton publication effectively declared her the winner before the debate even began. Not only did the Times support Hillary in its editorials, but it also took extreme measures to discredit Trump as unfit for public office. Polls and pundits–take the even, take the odd. There are in my opinion equally unreliable.
The debate itself was more or less what one expects in our corporatized political climate. Corporately financed and corporately orchestrated entertainment for the American public has replaced the former more seriously conducted debates organized by the League of Women Voters. By the way, where were the feminists when the corporations together with the two major political parties wrested the presidential debates away from the League? Until 1988, the League of Women Voters had organized the debates and even allowed third parties to participate. Today, debates are controlled by the Democratic and the Republican parties; they are financed by corporations such as Anheuser-Busch; and they are presented by corporate media with all of the glamour and superficiality of a Hollywood gala.
With regard to content, the debate really did not have much to offer. Both candidates reiterated their positions on various issues, responding to questions which were broadly formulated. The pro-Clinton bias of the debate’s structure was apparent when the moderator Lester Holt pressed Trump on the birther issue and on his tax returns, while allowing Hillary a free pass on the various scandals in which she is still involved. One of the curiosities of this campaign is the emphasis being placed on temperament. It’s too bad that Teddy Roosevelt is not still alive. If he were in the campaign, there would be a much livelier discussion about the demeanor of this or that candidate. In general, it is fair to say that Trump has a spontaneous, fiery personality, whereas Hillary projects the image of smugness and arrogance. She is certainly more polished in her responses, but her Madison Avenue one-liners seem so rehearsed that they tend to lose their effectiveness. Trump, on the other hand, has a refreshing candor, but unfortunately one never knows what he is going to say.
Perhaps the presidential debates will sway a few undecided voters, but overall, I do not think that they have the importance attributed to them. In fact, I think that the debates can actually distract our attention from more important events taking place. For example, on the issue of foreign policy and the wars in the Middle East, the separately conducted discussions of Prime Minister Netanyahu with Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were probably more important for the coming years than anything that will be said in the debates. These meetings were strategically planned to take place on the eve of the debate and drew much less media attention than they otherwise would have. With all of the speculation about Trump’s temperament and the talk about Hillary’s step stool, the symbolic value of the discussions with Netanyahu must have had a far greater impact on the Islamic world than on the American electorate.
Be that as it may, more debates are scheduled to come. Perhaps something significant will happen in the next one. If not, make some popcorn and enjoy it. Such events have become a traditional part of the Quadrennial Frenzy. Â
Villager Jack E. Brush is a frequent contributor to Villages-News.com    Â
