You’ll hear it first at Rain-Man of Politics: Donald Trump will win the first debate, Monday September 26th, handily. The recently held Commander-in-Chief forum showed a little glimpse into the dynamics of the first debate. The forum was also a throwback to the same style that consistently allowed Donald Trump to win the Republican Primary Debates. That opinion was not always shared amongst the media elite, usually faulting Trump for misquoting facts, making up facts, or for just having a surface level of understanding of any topic beyond immigration and business. However, Donald Trump spoke authoritatively and moderators cannot fact check mid debate. Trump also dominated the time allowed during the Republican debates, usually the person who speaks the most looks like the victor, regardless of fact. This trend will continue underscored by one simple reality- the first debate will be a lawyer vs. a showman.
The American public does not enjoy listening to lawyers outside of law procedurals on television (Law & Order). The American public absolutely adores showmen, of any type, of any sort. There were a few Republican Debates where, if just listening, you would think John Kasich or Marco Rubio came out on top. Their positions were sound, their positions were grounded in conservative Republican thought but they were never talked about as winning the debate. On the other hand, remember just listening, Donald Trump gave short answers and sometimes absurdly verbose answers that would deflect the question entirely. So two examples:
Question: “How will you pay for the wall?”
Response: “Mexico will pay for it”
Question: “How will you pay for the wall?
Response: “We will make Mexico pay for the wall, you know they are getting away with robbery, we have to build the wall. There are remittances, we can sanction we have different methods. I’m also looking into other ways, you understand.”
This was typical of the Trump Q&A during the debates. Over the radio this may come across poorly. After all voters want details and there are no details in short or verbose answers. Yet on television, the answer is just as important as the delivery. Trump delivered his “Mexico will pay for it” lines authoritatively, at times, including the audience with a simple “they know it’s wrong what goes on” or “we know how to get Mexico to pay for it”. Once again, on substance nothing but rhetorically brilliant as lines like that bring the audience in while giving them a decision making stake. Conversely Trump would give verbose answers as well. These answers would meander, at times taking both sides of a topic or listing impossibilities. For example, the United States just cannot slap a tariff on Mexican goods as it would violate NAFTA. Whether you agree or not with NAFTA the actual legal workings make slapping a tariff on Mexican goods nigh impossible. Trump’s prior debate performances may have been light on substance but on style there was not anyone better.
Looking back there is historical precedent for this exact type of behavior by two different United States Presidents.
First let’s look at the debate that will be analogous to the first debate between Clinton and Trump. In 1960, a young politician with a great smile took on a political juggernaut. I’m alluding to, of course, the first debate between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon. The debate was the first to be delivered to the American public on television while it would also be covered on the radio. The radio audience listened to Richard Nixon give sensible answers, policy driven goals, and an all-in-all understanding of what it took to be president. The radio crowd also thought Kennedy gave short answers, did not give clear answers, and did not fully grasp the policy discussions that were taking place. For them it was clear, Richard Nixon won the debate. To the radio listeners surprise they would read in the papers that JFK had a dominating debate performance and Richard Nixon looked worried, maybe ill. Sound familiar yet?
Appearance and delivery matters more than substance in politics when addressing a television audience. Nixon didn’t bother with makeup, he gave thoughtful but long answers, and ultimately he spoke like a lawyer. Kennedy got ready for the camera and spoke to the American public like they were having a short conversation around a dinner table. He allowed the audience to fill in the blanks while letting on that he did feel they were smart enough to fill in the blanks (empowering the audience). He acted like a showman including the audience in the grand finale- the audience loved it. Showmanship in politics is tremendously important. Not to undercut the nuts and bolts of political theory but if the message is good but the messenger is poor expect nobody to get the message. Trump has understood this so far in the presidential cycle and there is no reason why, out of the blue, in the first debate this reality will change.
The other President who mastered showmanship may seem very unlikely but true never the less, President Ike Eisenhower was a brilliant communicator. One specific example of Ike the Communicator that stands out is the first television news conference given by a sitting US President in 1955. Understandably this news conference was a big deal, each reporter there felt like they were part of history. Eisenhower’s advisors were understandably frightened. Reporters asking the President questions? It will be recorded? We don’t know the questions beforehand? This seemed like a calamity in the making from a communications perspective. Before taking the podium a very nervous press secretary, Jim Hagerty, advised Eisenhower to not take questions. That was not Eisenhower’s plan; to paraphrase he turned to Press Secretary Hagerty and said “Don’t worry, I’ll confuse them”. That he did. When asked difficult questions he would respond with long verbose answers, lots of details, lots of big words, lots of meandering and most importantly zero substance. It would only be in the days following the press conference that the press corps would realize most answers they received amounted to nothing new. It sounded great, it looked great, but there was no new information.
Fast forward to today, Donald Trump has mastered the art “Don’t worry, I’ll confuse them”. This rhetorical strategy was on full displayed during the Republican Primary Debates. To a lesser degree it was on display with Matt Lauer at the Commander-in-Chief forum. Donald Trump offered nothing more than his original campaign promises. When pressed you get verbose answers. For example, Trump will say, in the same sentence regarding immigration that ‘everyone needs to go back, follow the law, but it will be done humanely case by case’. This sounds terrific. In reality, it does not make too much sense. Case by case would imply not everyone needs to go back, but that some would stay, but then that wouldn’t be following the law, but then what is humane? Are you confused yet because I am and the only conclusion left is Trump is strong on immigration- the exact message he wants, forget the details.
It will be of no surprise that Donald Trump will be the victor of the first Presidential Debate. In a matchup of lawyer vs. showman, the showman always wins in America. I fully expect Hillary Clinton to have an error free, fact based; sound game plan entering the debate. All of that means nothing against a showman. Worse yet for the Clinton camp everyone expects her to perform better than Trump, once again sound familiar? I also fully expect Hillary Clinton to sound like a lawyer, much the same way candidate Clinton sounded when she debated now President Obama. I remember those debates vividly. In the majority, if going by policy, Hillary Clinton was ahead by a country mile. Optics and delivery went to Barack Obama. He looked woefully informed on foreign policy but sounded sincere in guaranteeing no more foreign adventurism. Clinton played the sensible realist position, and lost. Eight years later she will be facing another showman.