Presidential campaign debates in the 2020 elections: debate scholarship and the future of presidential debates

Four years ago, the Argumentation and Advocacy special issue of presidential debate scholarship was introduced by noting the “unconventional, unpredictable, unprecedented, and on many occasions rather ‘unpresidential’ presidential contest.” The studies contained in that issue went on to explore a “rather topsy-turvy election cycle [and] presidential campaign debates, with both primary and general-election debates serv[ing] as important campaign communication moments” (McKinney 2018, p. 72). Little did we know as we evaluated the debates of 2016 that what would occur in 2020 would set new records—on several measures new lows—for presidential debating, with a “topsy-turvy” debate cycle followed by one best characterized by outright tumult and disorder that overturned historic precedent and, potentially, has now established disturbing examples for the practice of future presidential debates. A common thread that runs throughout several of the studies contained in the current special issue of debate scholarship highlights the deficiencies with presidential candidates’ debate dialogue and argumentation, with these analyses often concluding the electorate is ill-served by current practices in presidential debating, particularly with our general-election debates. Important questions are raised by a number of these studies as to the future of our presidential debates, including how they should be structured, how journalists and debate moderators can best facilitate candidate debate, and suggestions for the type of candidate debate dialogue that will produce a more informed voter. Certainly, the stress of holding a national election in the midst of a global pandemic posed great challenges for many aspects of our electoral process in 2020, including our presidential debates. Yet, as the empirical analyses found in several of the studies in this special issue reveal, it was actually the incumbent president, Donald J. Trump, who posed perhaps the greatest threat to the institution of presidential debates. In keeping with his usual strategy of seeking to circumvent, control or even destroy those entities that present rules he must follow or would in any way limit his power and ability to exert his will, such as his frequent attacks on the judiciary (Rosen 2017), the legislative branch (Wehle 2020), or the press (Cobus 2020), Donald Trump also “declared war” on the Commission on Presidential Debates