The Spectacles of a Decade


Jacob A. Longoria, Staff Writer

As we draw closer to the Presidential Election, these United States were a witness to two of the largest spectacles of the decade, the first Presidential Debates of the General Election season. Candidates Hilary Clinton (Democratic nominee) and Donald Trump (Republican nominee) for a total of about 3 and a half hours, took to their prepared rhetoric and “had it out,” laying all scandals on the table.  The first debate covered a (to say the least) broad range of “issues” such as “America’s Direction,” with moderator Lester Holt, while the second debate focused a little bit more specifically on foreign affairs and commonly brought up economic endeavors with moderator Anderson Cooper. No matter what affiliation or bias, both Democrats and Republicans agree on the idea that there was something terribly wrong with the debates. With complaints from conservative outlets from Donald Trump having a faulty microphone to letting Hillary have too much talking time, or liberal outlets complaining that Trump interrupted the moderators too much to Hillary not being strong enough in certain debatable aspects, the amounts of criticism are seemingly endless. Even moderators Lester Holt and Anderson Cooper have been criticized for their lenience. What does this say about the nature of the debates? Many Seniors and teachers will have the opportunity to vote in this election and most will be looking to make votes based on specific information they know about a candidate. What of the topics themselves and their relevance to a president’s duty to his or her country? Is something such as “Securing America” too broad of a subject to be truly elaborated upon, for the betterment of the voter’s understanding of a candidate’s specific plans, or does it allow for a productive discussion to take place between nominees? Or is the premise of allowing candidates to have a “productive discussion” even an adequate form of receiving justified information from the candidates in the first place? North Point Senior Aaron Abshire deduces the situation as this: “Debates are for selling themselves (the candidates) to the people. Promises are usually broken and lies are created.”  Perhaps the question America should be asking, is “how did these debates help me truly understand what these candidates plan to accomplish in their time as president?”