|
|
|
 
Presidential Debate `96
In the 1996 presidential debate, there were many controversial points
brought up and discussed by the candidates. There were opportunities to
turn the debate into a verbal cock fight, but the President was a model of
restraint and Senator Dole simply did not choose to aggravate the president
to an extreme. When Senator Dole referred to the `92 debate and how the
President referred to Bush as Mr. Bush, not Mr. President, and how he
himself would address Clinton as Mr. President, it was evident that Dole
was going to debate to make Clinton mad enough to make a mistake. Senator
Dole was apparently trying to bring out the beast in Clinton, but he kept
cool, while Clinton himself made no offensive remarks to Dole.
The questions asked brought about straight answers in the beginning,
but towards the end, the candidates were repeating themselves because the
questions began to lose focus and seemed to overlap enough to cause an
answer similar to if not the same as an earlier one. I do admit, though,
that the questions did attack key points and some answers that were given
did seriously cause some thought not to where the vote is going, but where
it will lead us. The answers given were fairly definitive, and the only
topic not seriously touched was scandals such as Watergate, etc.
The debate was key in helping me decide a now important part of my
life. I have decided that I am a Democrat. I found most of what Clinton had
said to be closest to what I believe, but there were a few points where I
did agree with Dole. Particularly on the quality of life discussion.
Clinton argued that the United States was better off, and Dole agreed, but
not exactly. Dole brought up the point that there were around 10,000
bankruptcies filed last year, and that taxes were higher, and people were
working harder for the same wages. Another Policy of Dole's that I agree
very much with is the Gun Check system. I think that it is an idea that is
long overdue.
The election this year was not as full of mudslinging as past years,
but I think it added to the sanity and constructiveness of the debate.
Nothing would get done if the candidates were simply vilifying each other.
|
|
|
