What Makes a Presidential Debate “Great”?
Last night’s presidential debate had me nearly passing out from nervous tension. George F. Will, on the other hand, said that “[i]t was a very good fight,” reminded us that he has “seen every presidential debate in American history since 1960” and argued that last night’s “was immeasurably the best.” And, while the debate may not have done my blood pressure any favors, I can certainly see why someone would call this debate the best. But then, Will also left me wondering, on what basis can we call a debate good, or even the “best?”
While I write a more extended analysis of some moments from Tuesday night’s debate, I’d like to hear what our readers think makes a debate “great.” Is it the tension? The substance? The style? Was it perhaps the sense that, after Obama’s widely panned performance in the first debate, this debate really mattered to the election?
Or was it just, you know, binders full of women?