War of Egos: Round Three
October 22, 2016
In her first response, Hillary Clinton opened the final presidential debate with a question to the American people: “What kind of country do we want to be?”
Whether you’re with her or subscribe to the idea of making America great again or are still Bernie or bust, this is the decision staring us all down as Uncle Sam waits with bated breath in trembling anticipation for our next move. The next person sitting behind the Resolute desk in the Oval will march us into the fray for the next four years, and perhaps beyond. It is when we are in the thick of it- the media frenzy, the unmerited mud-slinging, half-promises, and gilded ideals- that I come to understand why each election season CNN and Fox and citizens alike claim this year is a “revolution.” As a nation built revolt, it is only natural to shake with patriotic fervor as stump speeches ignite the American blood coursing through our veins when we are told this is the greatest country in the world. We are charged with the poetry of campaigns where candidates spout only what we want to hear and lay at our feet dedicating themselves to not only bolstering the country, but bettering our lives.
The presidential debates are designed to provide us insight as to which candidate we align with so we are equipped to choose who we think will practice what they promise. These formatted arguments are supposed to revolve around policies and the candidates’ leadership qualities. They are supposed to be civil and cordial, emulating the sophistication of American democracy where people are free to disagree over how to govern.
Not this time around.
This year, each of the three debates focused on the candidates as if they were television personalities with the same rhetorical strategies of name-calling and interruptions and finger-pointing throughout each round. Clinton and Trump concentrated more on who was Putin’s puppet than healthcare or intervention with Syria. They directed more effort toward proving the other’s incompetence than convincing voters their handling of the GDP would benefit the economy.
Despite both candidates throwing off their gloves, Clinton yet again came out on top. She is simply a more practiced debater who settles in on the stage, anticipating questions as if it were a game of chess, forever in pursuit of the adversary’s king. She is seeping up the support as Trump’s campaign dissipates in self-destruction with a candidate who never learned to apologize or to hold his tongue.
And yet, Americans breathed a sigh of relief as moderator Chris Wallace asked the candidates to provide un-prepared closing statements, for it heralded the end of debate season. This is not the sentiment we should harbor for watching the potential Commanders in Chief discuss the future of the United States. Lincoln would be shaking his head in shame. Where is the poise? The dignity to shake your opponent’s hand? Dirty American politics has never been so distastefully conspicuous.
Loading ...
