Appearance crowns winner of debate
Campus Times
October 11, 1996
by Andrea Gardner
Arts & Entertainment Editor
One wore a red tie, the other's was blue. One said we were "better
off," while the other said we should not have to "pinch pennies."
One talked tax cuts while the other boasted of the Brady Bill.
Both, however, want to be known as Mr. President, equally restating the
platforms we already know, while searching for the cleanest answers to the
toughest questions for 90 minutes.
Every rally, every commercial and every issue of Newsweek can tell you where
these two fellows stand on the big issues. Rather than leaving the viewers
with a revelation of who can save the nation, debates serve more as a tradition
to see who caves under the pressure and who can put the frosting on the
cake or the fancy wrapping on the gift box.
Still, there was media hype, a moderator, a big stage covered with red carpet
and two fellows who attempted to look their best for America for the evening.
Though the real issue is what is in their gift boxes, the debate winner
depends more on the wrapping-appearances and speaking ability.
The man with the fancy ribbon, ladies and gentleman, is Bill Clinton. He
was calm, cool and confident. He can smile, beam in the good lighting, deviate
from the issues that make him look bad and play up the good stuff. He performed
the best and came out the winner.
Dole tried to match up and had some good lines, but the majority of America
will remember him standing stiffly, stumbling over words, stuttering, blinking
continuously and speaking in a monotone voice.
The few times Dole attempted animation, he came off as uncomfortable and
scowling, recalling two-bit incidents such as
Clinton's failure to call George Bush "Mr. President" in the 1992
debates. Other cheap shots got a laughs, but were otherwise ineffective.
Clinton did his share of mudslinging as well. He just did it with an eloquent
touch. While viewers were surveying Dole's insecure nature, petty arguments
and boring poppycock, Clinton spoon-fed his audience what they wanted to
hear, along with his charm, a few jokes and his pearly whites.
In response to the drug issue, the man who once told an MTV audience that
he would inhale if he had it to do all over again, Clinton weaseled out
with some choice words and even got away with a "no comment" later
in the debates.
Judging from the outside appearances of poise and confidence, Clinton surely
wraps himself in a Tiffany's box with shiny silver ribbon that Dole could
not seem to unravel.
Whether viewers let the show affect their vote will depend on the individual,
which both candidates say they value much more than government.
When individuals vote next month, will they recall the bills each candidate
voted for and the contradictions each has made in their political careers?
Or will they recall being swept off their feet in a 90 minute courtship?
In the built-up tradition of the Presidential debates, voters are looking
beyond the character, trust, moral fiber and history of their candidates.
Charm, poise and appearance is turning elections into
pageantry.
It is enough to make an American wonder if a swimsuit and evening gown competition
will follow in the coming years of the Presidential debates.
If voters go to the ballot box remembering only the impressive appearance
of a skilled debater, they may just get a disappointing surprise when they
unwrap their new gift to discover a piece of coal to enjoy and depend upon
for the next four years of democracy.
Andrea Gardner, a junior broadcast journalism major, is the Arts and
Entertainment editor of the Campus Times. She can be reached by e-mail
at gardnera@ulvacs.ulaverne.edu.