The rules of decorum for debates that we thought we knew, that we were taught in school, that we observed while in classrooms or conference rooms while interacting with fellow students or colleagues --those seem to have been utterly discarded during the Republican primary debates.
One can talk over opponents. One doesn’t have to wait for any other candidate to finish. Just butt in whenever. Whenever it’s convenient. Whenever the other candidate is about to head over to an uncomfortable point. Whenever one pretty much just wants to occupy the stage. Disrespect the other candidates, shall we?
Apparently, one can also be petty. One can argue about the most absurd things --if it will score points and make the opponent look bad-- then raise a super petty point. Like, when attacking a former ambassador to the United Nations, bring up curtains!
Tim Scott, a former appointee of Nikki Haley, blithely pointed out her expenditure of $50,000 for curtains during her tenure as UN Ambassador. Well chosen as his attack point. The two spent a few minutes arguing about who actually spent the cash, as Haley chose to side-step accountability by finger-pointing to Obama as the purchaser of those curtains, while Tim Scott taunted her by demanding to know whether she had returned the curtains.
Both debaters failed in this exchange. Scott could have spent his time pointing out Haley’s failures as an ambassadress instead of zeroing in on her decorating decisions, and Haley could have cited her focus on more urgent international crises during the curtain installation process. But no. The adults in the room seemed to have thought this insignificant topic, room decor, was worth primetime TV.
Was it because their audience (Republican voters) couldn’t possibly be expected to understand topics like the international political arena? Since when did expensive decor become such a vital telltale to decision-making ability?
That wasn’t the lowest point in the process, however. In the same vein of disrespect, debaters can also disrespect august personages --like the sitting president. Normally, there is a veneer of respect for institutions, like the Supreme Court, or famous figures, like Nobel laureates or revered figures. Yet everyone piled on Joe Biden, the current holder of the post they all wanted.
Of course, there were criticisms about his decisions (which should be fair game) that emanated from the debaters. Policies, executive action, orders --all those can be the legitimate subject of discourse by contenders for the post. But Mike Pence, former vice president, wanted to underscore his point by a degrading dig at Biden: He should be on the unemployment line. Yes, we all know you want the job, but this bad? It’s surprising you didn’t wish him to keel over and just drop dead.
Former presidents were not spared the depths. And it wasn’t just disrespect that was dished out --outright insults, apparently, are now par for the course in presidential debates. For example, Chris Christie outright labeled Donald Trump a coward. Calling him out for failing to show up at the debate stage, Christie threw out a newly-minted nickname for Donald Trump: “Donald Duck”, the debate ducker. Funny yes, but presidentiable?
Not just that. For Christie, the Donald is also a divisive duck that needs to be ditched. “This guy has not only divided our party – he’s divided families all over this country. He’s divided friends all over this country,” Christie said. “He needs to be voted off the island and he needs to be taken out of this process.” Voted out of the island which one is already sharing with other Republicans --now that’s painful.
Yet this insult still wasn’t as bad as what Nikki Haley hurled at another candidate, Vivek Ramaswany. Essentially, Haley called him stupid. In response to Vivek’s point, Haley had this to say: “Honestly, every time I hear you, I feel a little bit dumber for what you said.”
Such fine examples of decorum. Pretend we’re not here, adults. Let us see your real selves. Which is probably what we should all hope for when we’re finessing candidates.