Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
Presidential debate at Hofstra University (September 26, 2016)
Ballotpedia's scope changes periodically, and this article type is no longer actively created or maintained. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.
| 2016 general election debates |
|---|
| Read more about Presidential debates (2015-2016): •Presidential debate prep teams, 2016 •Commission on Presidential Debates •Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016 •Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 |
This article focuses exclusively on the first presidential debate of the 2016 general election season at Hofstra University on September 26, 2016. Click here to access Ballotpedia's full 2015-2016 presidential debate coverage.
The first presidential debate of the 2016 general election took place on September 26, 2016, at Hofstra University in Hempstead, New York. The debate was originally scheduled to take place at Wright State University in Ohio but was moved after the university withdrew, citing concerns over costs and increased security.[1] This debate was the first time that Hillary Clinton (D) and Donald Trump (R) squared off against each other. Learn more about how the candidates prepared for the debate here.
Unlike in the primaries—where the parties, television networks, and sponsors were in control of the debates—the general election debates were overseen by a nonpartisan 501(c)(3) organization called the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD). The commission was founded in 1987 and has sponsored every general election presidential and vice presidential debate since 1988. It is in charge of scheduling the debates, finding venues, selecting moderators, and formulating the criteria to determine which candidates get to participate in the debates.
Basic Information
Date: September 26, 2016
Time: 9:00 pm EST
Location: Hempstead, New York
Venue: Hofstra University
Moderator: Lester Holt
Candidates: Hillary Clinton (D); Donald Trump (R)
Topics
The debate topics included "America's Direction," "Achieve Prosperity," and "Securing America."[2]
Format
The debate consisted of six 15 minute segments, each covering a major topic selected by the moderator and made public a week prior to the debate. Each segment opened with a question, and each candidate had two minutes to respond, followed by responses to each other. The remaining time was used for deeper discussion.[3]
Third-party candidates
On September 16, 2016, the Commission on Presidential Debates announced that Gary Johnson and Jill Stein would not be invited to the first presidential debate of the general election season. The Commission stated, “[T]he Board determined that the polling averages called for in the third criterion are as follows: Hillary Clinton (43%), Donald Trump (40.4%), Gary Johnson (8.4%) and Jill Stein (3.2%). Accordingly, Hillary Clinton and her running mate, Tim Kaine, and Donald Trump and his running mate, Mike Pence, qualify to participate in the September 26 presidential debate and the October 4 vice presidential debate, respectively. No other candidates satisfied the criteria for inclusion in the September 26 and October 4 debates. The criteria will be reapplied to all candidates in advance of the second and third presidential debates.”[4]
How did the commission decide who got to participate in this debate?
According to the CPD website, the organization used criteria that seeks to identify candidates "whose public support has made them the leading candidates." The CPD outlined its inclusion criteria on its website:[5]
| Debate qualification criteria[5] |
|---|
|
The choice of a 15 percent threshold, according to the CPD, was based on studies that determined that such a threshold allowed for other candidates that had enough "public support" to retain the purpose of the debates—that is, "voter education." The CPD, based on their own analysis, said that 15 percent is an achievable percentage for third-party candidates.[5] The five polls were chosen by Dr. Frank Newport, editor-in-chief of Gallup, who considered the methodology, sampling size, and frequency of the polls as well as the reputation of the polling institution. The polls used in 2012 were ABC News/The Washington Post, NBC News/The Wall Street Journal, CBS News/The New York Times, Fox News, and Gallup.[5]
2016 Polls
On August 15, 2016, the CPD released the five polls that it used to determine which candidates could participate in the first debate of the 2016 general election season.[6] Candidates needed to have an average of at least 15 percent in the following polls to be invited to the debate:
- ABC-Washington Post
- CBS-New York Times
- CNN-Opinion Research Corporation
- Fox News
- NBC-Wall Street Journal
The CPD based its selection of polls on the following criteria, according to its August 15 press release:
| “ |
|
” |
Debate Prep
Read below to see what the candidates and their campaigns had to say about preparing for the first debate. Scroll further down to learn about their debate prep teams.
- See also: Presidential debate prep teams, 2016
Clinton campaign
|
|
|
Trump campaign
|
|
|
Hillary Clinton's debate team
Hillary Clinton's debate prep team consisted of:
| Ron Klain: Klain was a senior aide to President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden's former chief of staff. He is part of Clinton's "inner circle" and was leading the debate prep for Clinton. He is the executive vice president and general counsel at Revolution LLC, an investment firm. In 2000, Klain was the general counsel for the Gore Recount Committee. He has also served as chief of staff to for Vice President Al Gore and Attorney General Janet Reno. He led the debate prep teams for both Democratic presidential nominees Al Gore and John Kerry[16][17] |
| Jake Sullivan: Sullivan was Clinton's senior policy advisor, especially foreign policy. In 2008, Sullivan joined Clinton's presidential campaign as her deputy policy director.[18][19] After Obama's election, Sullivan followed Secretary Clinton to the State Department, beginning as deputy chief of staff, and later serving as director of policy planning.[18][19] Sullivan also served as a national security advisor to Vice President Joe Biden.[19] |
| Karen Dunn: Dunn, an attorney, is a partner with the law firm Boies, Schiller and Flexner LLP. She served as associate counsel to President Obama and communications director and a senior advisor to Clinton while she served in the U.S. Senate. She also served as a law clerk for Judge Merrick Garland of the United States Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C.[20] |
| Robert Barnett: Barnett is a partner with the law firm Williams and Connolly LLP in Washington, D.C. Barnett represents a large number of politicians and writers, including Barack Obama, George W. Bush and James Carville. He has also represented television news correspondents and major corporate executives. The National Law Journal ranked Barnett as one of "The 100 Most Influential Lawyers in America."[21] |
| Mandy Grunwald: Grunwald is a Clinton veteran having worked on Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign, Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign. She has worked for Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). She was Clinton's senior media consultant.[22] |
| Jim Margolis: Clinton's 2016 campaign media advisor, Margolis was a media consultant for President Barack Obama in 2008 and again in 2012.[23] He also worked on John Kerry's 2004 presidential campaign and, in 1992, he worked on Bill Clinton's campaign.[24] |
| John Podesta: Podesta was Clinton's campaign chairman. In 1993, Podesta joined former President Bill Clinton's White House staff, first as staff secretary, then as deputy chief of staff, and finally as chief of staff.[25] In 2003, Podesta founded the Center for American Progress (CAP), which The Washington Post has called "the preeminent liberal think tank in Washington."[26] Upon the election of President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden in 2008, Podesta was appointed by Obama to act as co-chair of the Obama-Biden Transition Project, which was meant to create a smooth transition from former President George W. Bush's (R) administration to Obama's.[27] In January 2014, Podesta returned to the White House to serve under President Obama as a senior advisor.[28] |
| Joel Benenson: In the 1996 election cycle, Benenson conducted polls for former President Bill Clinton's (D) presidential campaign.[29] In 2000, Benenson co-founded the Benenson Strategy Group and in 2008, Benenson was hired by Barack Obama's presidential campaign as a pollster. He also worked on Obama's 2012 campaign.[30] |
| Jennifer Palmieri: Palmieri was Clinton's 2016 campaign communications director. She spent five years in the White House as Bill Clinton's deputy director of scheduling and advance.[31] She was promoted to the role of deputy press secretary for the last three years of Clinton's presidency.[32] Palmieri became senior vice president of the Center for American Progress (CAP) and president of the CAP Action Fund. Palmieri continued her role at CAP and the CAP Fund until 2011, when she joined the Obama administration's communication team.[32] |
| Philippe Reines: Reines worked with Clinton while she served in the U.S. Senate and at the U.S. Department of State. At the State Department, Reines was Clinton's personal spokesman and senior communications advisor. In her memoir, "Hard Choices," Clinton described Reines as "passionate, loyal, and shrewd," adding that she "always trust[s] him to speak his mind."[33] According to The New York Times, Reines had been serving as an unofficial campaign advisor for the Clinton campaign. He is the founder and managing director of Beacon Global Strategies, a political consulting firm based in Washington, D.C.[33][34] |
Donald Trump's debate team
Donald Trump's debate prep team consisted of:
| Roger Ailes: Ailes, the former Fox News CEO and chairman, after his dismissal from the news network, joined Trump's debate team. He has debate prep experience having helped prepare Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon in their debate prep.[35] |
| Kellyanne Conway: Conway, Trump's 2016 campaign manager, was reportedly leading Trump's prep for the debate. As president of the Robert Mercer-backed Keep the Promise I super PAC, Conway supported former 2016 Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz.[36] |
| Rudy Giuliani: Giuliani, the former New York mayor, had endorsed Trump in April 2016. He was acting as Trump's representative to the debate commission and was helping to guide Trump's debate strategies.[37] |
| Laura Ingraham: Ingraham hosts the radio talk show The Laura Ingraham Show, which is broadcast over 225 stations around the U.S. She co-founded and serves as the editor-in-chief of LifeZette.com, "a cultural and political web destination for conservatives and independents."[38] Ingraham is a Fox News contributor and a fill-in host on The O'Reilly Factor. She has also served as a defense attorney.[38] |
| Stephen Bannon: Bannon was the CEO of Donald Trump's presidential campaign, and executive chairman of Breitbart News, a conservative news organization founded by the late Andrew Breitbart.[39][40] He is also the executive chairman and co-founder of the Government Accountability Institute, a group that aims to expose government corruption.[41] |
| Jason Miller: Miller formerly acted as the senior communications director for Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz in 2016, but, in June 2016, Miller took up the position of senior communications advisor for Trump's campaign.[42][43] He worked on Rudy Giuliani's 2008 presidential campaign.[44].[45] |
Statistics
This article analyzes the central themes of the first general election presidential debate held on September 26, 2016, at Hofstra University in Hempstead, New York. The transcript prepared by The Washington Post was used to measure candidate participation and audience engagement.[46] Footage from the debate was consulted where there were ambiguities in the text.
For comparison, see the analyses of the final Democratic primary and Republican primary debates held in April 2016 and March 2016, respectively.
Participants
 Hillary Clinton (D) |
Donald Trump (R) | |||
Segments
This debate featured 15 unique discussion segments covering the economy, criminal justice, race relations, and national security. There were no opening or closing statements. These discussion segments were measured by any shift in the theme of a discussion prompted by the moderator, Lester Holt.
- Job creation
- Govenment regulations and trade
- Taxes
- Trump's tax returns
- Clinton's private email server
- Race relations
- Stop-and-frisk policies
- Implicit bias and law enforcement
- Trump and the birther movement
- Cybersecurity
- Domestic terrorism
- Presidential temperament and Trump's support for the Iraq War
- Nuclear policy
- Clinton's stamina
- Response to outcome of election
One-fourth of the debate's discussion segments was focused on international trade and national security. There were seven countries mentioned five or more times: China, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Mexico, North Korea, and Russia.
Candidate participation by speaking order
This study calculated the number of times a candidate was prompted to speak first or second during a discussion segment by the moderator. Although both candidates participated in every discussion segment, Trump was asked to respond to the moderator's questions first more frequently. In the final five discussion segments, Trump was called on to speak first four out of five times.
Candidate participation by speaking time
According to The New York Times, Trump spoke for 44.4 minutes and Clinton spoke for 41.4 minutes.[47] Trump also spoke at a quicker rate than Clinton, saying approximately 2,200 more words than her throughout the night.
Audience engagement
Audience engagement was measured by noting applause, cheering, and laughter in The Washington Post's transcript. Footage from the debate was consulted when the text was ambiguous about to whom the audience was responding.
Although the audience was instructed prior to the debate "to remain silent so that we can focus on what the candidates are saying," the audience audibly applauded or laughed 14 times throughout the event. Holt admonished the audience once when it applauded in response to Trump calling on Clinton to release additional emails from her private email server.
Overall, Clinton received two more positives instances of audience engagement than Trump. Given Holt's instruction to the audience, both candidates underperformed in engagement with the live audience compared to previous debates. In the final primary debates, for example, the audience responded positively more than 60 times to Clinton on April 14, 2016, and 30 times to Trump on March 10, 2016.
Comments and exchanges receiving an audience response
- Clinton: I have a feeling that by, the end of this evening, I'm going to be blamed for everything that's ever happened.
Trump: Why not?
Clinton: Why not? Yeah, why not?
- Trump: I will release my tax returns—against my lawyer's wishes—when she releases her 33,000 e-mails that have been deleted. As soon as she releases them, I will release.
- Trump: Our country has tremendous problems. We're a debtor nation. We're a serious debtor nation. And we have a country that needs new roads, new tunnels, new bridges, new airports, new schools, new hospitals. And we don't have the money, because it's been squandered on so many of your ideas.
Clinton: And maybe because you haven't paid any federal income tax for a lot of years.
- Clinton: I think Donald just criticized me for preparing for this debate. And, yes, I did. And you know what else I prepared for? I prepared to be president. And I think that's a good thing.
- Trump: But let me just tell you. When you talk about healing, I think that I've developed very, very good relationships over the last little while with the African-American community. I think you can see that. And I feel that they really wanted me to come to that conclusion. And I think I did a great job and a great service not only for the country, but even for the president, in getting him to produce his birth certificate.
Holt: Secretary Clinton?
Clinton: Well, just listen to what you heard.
- Trump: Well, I have much better judgment than she does. There's no question about that. I also have a much better temperament than she has, you know?
- Trump: I have a much better—she spent—let me tell you—she spent hundreds of millions of dollars on an advertising -- you know, they get Madison Avenue into a room, they put names—oh, temperament, let's go after—I think my strongest asset, maybe by far, is my temperament. I have a winning temperament. I know how to win. She does not have a...
Holt: Secretary Clinton?
Trump: Wait. The AFL-CIO the other day, behind the blue screen, I don't know who you were talking to, Secretary Clinton, but you were totally out of control. I said, there's a person with a temperament that's got a problem.
Holt: Secretary Clinton?
Clinton: Whew, OK.
- Clinton: So a man who can be provoked by a tweet should not have his fingers anywhere near the nuclear codes, as far as I think anyone with any sense about this should be concerned.
Trump: That line's getting a little bit old, I must say. I would like to...
Clinton: It's a good one, though. It well describes the problem.
- Trump: You have to be able to negotiate our trade deals. You have to be able to negotiate, that's right, with Japan, with Saudi Arabia. I mean, can you imagine, we're defending Saudi Arabia? And with all of the money they have, we're defending them, and they're not paying? All you have to do is speak to them. Wait. You have so many different things you have to be able to do, and I don't believe that Hillary has the stamina.
Holt: Let's let her respond.
Clinton: Well, as soon as he travels to 112 countries and negotiates a peace deal, a cease-fire, a release of dissidents, an opening of new opportunities in nations around the world, or even spends 11 hours testifying in front of a congressional committee, he can talk to me about stamina.
- Trump: Hillary has experience, but it's bad experience. We have made so many bad deals during the last—so she's got experience, that I agree.
- Trump: But it's bad, bad experience. Whether it's the Iran deal that you're so in love with, where we gave them $150 billion back, whether it's the Iran deal, whether it's anything you can—name—you almost can't name a good deal. I agree. She's got experience, but it's bad experience. And this country can't afford to have another four years of that kind of experience.
- Clinton: And one of the worst things he said was about a woman in a beauty contest. He loves beauty contests, supporting them and hanging around them. And he called this woman "Miss Piggy." Then he called her "Miss Housekeeping," because she was Latina. Donald, she has a name.
Trump: Where did you find this? Where did you find this?
Clinton: Her name is Alicia Machado.
Trump: Where did you find this?
Clinton: And she has become a U.S. citizen, and you can bet...
Trump: Oh, really?
Clinton: ... she's going to vote this November.
- Trump: But it's certainly not a nice thing that she's done. It's hundreds of millions of ads. And the only gratifying thing is, I saw the polls come in today, and with all of that money...
Holt: We have to move on to the final question.
Trump: ... $200 million is spent, and I'm either winning or tied, and I've spent practically nothing.
- Trump: Look, here's the story. I want to make America great again. I'm going to be able to do it. I don't believe Hillary will. The answer is, if she wins, I will absolutely support her.
Candidate analysis
|
|
Insiders Poll
Clinton earns a win in first presidential debate
September 27, 2016
By James A. Barnes
Like the 1970s television commercial on investment advice prescribed, Hillary Clinton won her first presidential debate with Donald Trump the old-fashioned way—she earned it. In the run-up to their face-off, Trump reportedly decided to eschew traditional debate prep and rely instead on his instincts and the communications skills he honed on his reality television show that boosted him to the GOP presidential nomination, defying the will of his party’s establishment and the predictions of media pundits. Clinton prepared for her encounter with Trump at Hofstra University in New York as she has for dozens of previous debates—thoroughly.
Ballotpedia surveyed more than 150 Democratic and Republican strategists, pollsters, media consultants, activists, lobbyists, and allied interest group operatives, after the conclusion of the September 26 debate and found that an overwhelming majority of Democratic Insiders and a plurality of Republicans thought the former secretary of state emerged as the victor in her showdown with Trump. Overall, almost two-thirds of the Insiders thought Clinton carried the evening.
Among the 75 Democratic Insiders who responded, an overwhelming 93 percent declared Clinton the “biggest winner” of the night. Another 5 percent called the debate a draw, and 1 percent (one Democratic Insider) said that Trump had prevailed. The 76 Republican Insiders who responded to the survey were much more divided, but a plurality of 38 percent still gave the edge to Clinton. Another 30 percent thought the debate was a draw, and 32 percent thought Trump had bested Clinton.
One persistent theme from both Democratic and Republican Insiders was that Clinton was prepared, focused, and able to control much of the debate. “She drove the conversation and came off as well prepared,” said one Democratic Insider. “HRC controlled the tempo; he was defensive,” asserted another. A Republican Insider who also thought Clinton won the evening concurred: “Hillary drove the debate, stayed comfortably on offense and didn’t get rattled by his constant interruptions.” Another Republican said that Clinton “didn’t chase, stayed focused and used the temperament issue well.”
A big factor in Clinton’s success on Monday night was her ability to bait Trump with pointed jabs that distracted him from his stronger arguments. “He could have nailed her on a number of points had he been better prepared and had not taken the bait so often,” moaned one Republican Insider. This survey was conducted anonymously to encourage candor from the Insiders.
Trump’s demeanor, which at times swung from brash to defensive, did little to assuage doubts about his temperament, although later in the debate the New York real estate mogul insisted it was a personal strength. “She looked presidential,” said one Democratic Insider. “He looked like he was in a narcissistic rage.” Another added, “Trump was exposed: defensive, ego-driven. Hillary was not perfect but stood above him most of the night.” A Republican Insider opined, “They’re both dreadfully awful, but he was borderline insane.” Another Republican described Trump’s performance as “incoherent babbling,” and a third acknowledged, “Trump has yet to put to rest temperament issues.”
While Democrats were nearly unanimous in their judgment that Clinton had vanquished Trump in the debate, some wondered how significant her victory was. “She looked good and sounded presidential, but I’m not sure it will matter overall,” averred one Democratic Insider. “Hillary can’t seem to show passion and that made it closer than it otherwise would have been,” declared another. “Trump failed on the issues of race, women, tax returns and most everything else, but the fact that she could not put him away should scare the Clinton folks.”
Indeed, a few Democrats noted that Clinton was unable to land a knockout blow on Trump. “She won on points, but didn’t knock him down once,” observed one Democratic Insider. “The best moments were when she just allowed him to rant,” said another. “She did miss a couple of opportunities to throw some knockout punches though.”
Of course, had Clinton stumbled badly in the debate, Democrats would have been in a panic. The handful of Democrats who thought the debate was a draw was more circumspect. “The pundits will say she won, but the poll numbers won’t move,” predicted one Democratic Insider. “She is so much more qualified, but he is still tapping into the anger,” cautioned another.
While Trump has raised questions about Clinton’s stamina, it was Trump who seemed to wear down as the debate wore on. “Trump started strong, but then fell off as he took the Clinton bait and he did not look or sound good for most of the last hour,” said one Republican Insider. “Trump won portions of the first half, Clinton crushed him in most of the second half,” judged another. “He was ill-prepared and she was ready.” A Democratic Insider joked, “Ninety minutes is not Trump’s friend. She showed the stamina and the solutions.”
Republicans who thought that Trump was the biggest winner of the debate offered varied reasons for his success. “Hillary was not likeable enough,” maintained one GOP Insider. “Trump got over the acceptability threshold.” Another felt that Trump benefited from being the candidate of change and put it this way: “Change versus status quo; change wins.” And a third said that the GOP nominee “Exceeded expectations and spoke in a manner normal Americans understand.”
Among Republican Insiders who thought that the debate was a draw, there was a clear sense of missed opportunities by their standard bearer. “Trump has a lot more upside, but didn’t figure out a way to realize it tonight,” said one GOP Insider. “HRC is still deeply, deeply unlikable; DJT still nutty,” said another Republican. “Trump had moments of clarity, but blew his chance to make that the overall take away.” And a third maintained if Trump “had prepared even a little he would have won huge.”
One useful thing to remember about these kinds of surveys of elite opinion, they tend to be better measures of the inside-the-Beltway zeitgeist than a forecast of the future. During the Republican presidential primary debates, Republican Insiders routinely downplayed Trump’s performance and usually called Florida Sen. Marco Rubio the “biggest winner” of those multi-candidate encounters. Ultimately, how many of these same GOP Insiders felt about debates had little bearing on the outcome of the Republican presidential nominating contest. And many of these same Democratic Insiders judged Clinton the “biggest winner,” and by a wide margin, of every one of their party’s primary season debates. They are accustomed to her turning in a solid performance.
James A. Barnes is a senior writer for Ballotpedia and co-author of the 2016 edition of the Almanac of American Politics.
Commentary
The columns below were authored by guest columnists. The opinions and views belong to the authors.
How much will Clinton’s opening win count?
September 27, 2016
By Karlyn Bowman
Karlyn Bowman, a widely respected analyst of public opinion, is a senior fellow and research coordinator at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C.
The polls before the debate suggested Americans thought Hillary Clinton would win the first presidential debate of the general election season. The post-debate CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey suggests the public’s prediction was correct.
Presidential debates are serious things, and Americans expect the candidates to prepare for them. Trump appeared to have decided to wing it. Clinton was organized in her responses; he wasn’t. She was calm; he wasn’t. She was cool; he wasn’t. She looked collected; he looked disheveled. She seemed to have thought very carefully about how to get under Trump’s skin and she did so successfully on several occasions last night.
Although Trump made several good points in areas such as trade where polls show that many Americans share his concerns, he was unable to score debate points because his answers were not clear. His positions are close to enough voters to win this presidential race, but he didn't prosecute his case successfully last night when he had many opportunities to do so.
Will the polling needle move? Probably a little in the short term. The last few polls showed that Trump was clearly closing the gap with Clinton. That momentum, if it was that, will probably stop. As of this writing, we don’t know the size of the audience, but the general impression that will be conveyed to millions who didn’t watch or turned into Monday Night Football after the opening minutes of the debate is that she won.
How much does that matter? Most Trump supporters probably don’t think their man did well last night, but they won’t abandon him. Her supporters are no doubt energized by her performance and that may help her. Will her performance bring groups such as millennials who have been lukewarm towards her candidacy to the polls? I doubt it and she needs to do well among the group. Will his performance help him with white college-educated women where she leads? I doubt it.
Pollsters who have looked carefully at post-debate polls from previous presidential elections tell us that a single debate can have an impact on the race, but their overall impression is that the totality of the debates doesn’t really change things much. This campaign isn’t over yet. Stay tuned.
Preparation Trumps Winging It
September 27, 2016
By David Kusnet
David Kusnet was chief speechwriter for former President Bill Clinton from 1992 through 1994. He is a principal and the senior writer at the Podesta Group, a government relations and public relations firm in Washington, D.C.
Back in August 2015, I wrote that Carly Fiorina had overshadowed her male opponents in the first Republican presidential debate because she had prepared painstakingly, while most of her rivals weren’t yet ready for prime time.
Over the next year, my analysis seemed less than prophetic. Fiorina fell by the wayside, for all her polished performances in the debate, while Donald Trump, who was clearly making it up as he went along, sailed to the nomination.
But last night, we saw a well-prepared candidate out-perform a poorly trained Trump by every traditional standard of successful debating. The thoroughly primed candidate, of course, was Hillary Clinton. And, while the first Clinton-Trump debate was the highest-profile political event in many years, it offers lessons for public speakers at other events.
First, preparation matters, as Trump would say, “hugely.” With more than 30 years in public life, as Trump kept reminding the viewers, Clinton already knows her stuff. But preparation helps even the best-informed speaker explain complexities and make her case.
For such a speaker, preparation doesn’t mean sticking slavishly to a text or memorizing your remarks. Instead, it means having a sense of what you want to say, how your best phrasings will help you make larger points and how to respond to a questioner or a critic.
Second, you can’t just “unleash” your soundbites, as George H. W. Bush said in his first debate with Michael Dukakis in 1988. Trump came prepared with talking points that presented him as the candidate of change and tapped into Americans’ anger about jobs shipped overseas and a political class insulated from the consequences of its decisions.
But he recited these lines without a context with what said he had said just before or a compelling conclusion that would have compelled Clinton to respond to him on issues where she is vulnerable. Thus, there were few, if any, memorable moments where Trump outscored Clinton. Still, there will be two more debates, and, if Trump can find a way to lead with his big points and support them with facts and anecdotes, he will be more formidable.
Third, use plain English – “speaking American.” In the only exchange that Trump may have won, Clinton discussed “infrastructure,” while Trump talked about bridges, highways, roads, airports and school and hospital buildings.
Fourth, dominant body-language isn’t enough. Trump prevailed in the primaries largely by presenting himself as the alpha male, with gestures of dominance and dismissive phrases directed at his opponents, such as “little Marco” Rubio and “low-energy” Jeb Bush. He brought the same body-language to last night’s debate. But, this time, it didn’t work.
Instead, Clinton’s preparation trumped her rival’s posturing. And gender isn’t irrelevant to this. Over the years, I have worked with many speakers, and I have never heard a woman say, “I’ll wing it.” Many men think they can improvise an entire speech. But there’s only one Bill Clinton.
Last night, Hillary Clinton was so well-prepared that she even had an answer to criticism of her preparation. “I think Donald just criticized me for preparing for this debate,” she said. “And yes I did. And you know what else I prepared for? I prepared to be president. And I think that’s a good thing.”
Can Trump recalibrate and rebound?
September 27, 2016
By James A. Barnes
Senior Staff Writer
Donald Trump’s face-off with Hillary Clinton at Hofstra University in New York on Monday night was arguably his worst debate performance since the February 25 CNN-Telemundo GOP primary debate showdown at the University of Houston where blows rained down on Trump and his current communications adviser, Jason Miller, said the candidate “lost a lot of votes.”
Trump was staggering, but he got a couple of breaks from his GOP opponents. One of them Trump helped engineer: New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie endorsed New Yorker the day after the debate, quickly shifting the news coverage from Trump’s flagging performance in Houston to his newfound support—the first instance where one of the defeated GOP White House hopefuls had endorsed a former rival. The other break got came when Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who was widely seen as having won the Houston encounter, decided to try to pile on Trump with the same kind of insults that were a trademark of the brash billionaire’s campaign. That backfired and diminished Rubio in the process.
Clinton does appear ready to accommodate Trump with her own self-inflicted wound, and Trump has no blockbuster endorsement to pull out of the hat. (Although the Clintons have an uncanny knack for creating their own predicaments.)
Was Trump fatally wounded by his performance on the stage at Hofstra? If the roller coaster nature of this presidential campaign is any guide, probably not. But will his momentum be stalled? That’s more likely to happen. When either one of the two major party contenders have come under intense criticism in the media, their ratings often sag. The press pounded trump after he attempted to retreat from his past “birther” statements at a September 15 campaign event in his new hotel in Washington, D.C. Instead of extinguishing the controversy, Trump inflamed it—and the media coverage—by insisting that Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign had injected the issue into the public dialogue. The coverage was unmerciful and Trump’s momentum briefly stalled before he started to climb back up in the polls, effectively catching Clinton in some of them.
Still, Trump’s team can’t count on political gravity to draw the two major party contenders back to parity. The candidate is going to have to stop ‘stepping in it’ and step up. The most natural for that to happen is the next presidential debate on October 9.
Presidential hopefuls have managed to rebound from bad debate performances. Perhaps the most famous bounce-back came when Ronald Reagan was able to overcome questions about his age in the second debate of the 1984 president campaign after he ignited them by a languid performance in the first. Early in their second and final face-off of the campaign, Reagan was asked how he would hold up under the pressure of an event like the Cuban missile crisis that taxed even a youthful president, John F. Kennedy. Reagan, then 73, replied, “I will not make age an issue in this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience." Even the 56-year-old Democratic nominee, Walter Mondale, cracked a wide smile at Reagan’s one-liner.
Is Trump capable of such a deft jab? He’s got an entertainer’s timing and has parried attacks before, but there’s also the danger that a candidate can over-correct from a bad debate performance. In the first debate between Al Gore and George W. Bush in 2000, Gore came across as condescending for audibly sighing while Bush was answering a question. Gore was roundly criticized for bad debate manners, but in the next debate he was arguably too polite towards Bush, was a much less tenacious debater and came across at times as almost passive.
The trick for Trump will be the strike just the right balance when he next meets Clinton on the debate stage at Washington University in St. Louis. At the very least, he needs to put Clinton on the defensive without being overbearing. He’ll need to come across as credible and avoid pejoratives. That will require some degree of calibration for Trump—not an easy task for someone who relies on his instincts to guide him.
See also
- Presidential debates (2015-2016)
- Commission on Presidential Debates
- Presidential debate prep teams, 2016
- Presidential candidates, 2016
- Presidential election, 2016/Polls
Footnotes
- ↑ Politico, "Wright State University pulls out of hosting general election debate," July 19, 2016
- ↑ Politico, "Topics for first presidential debate announced," September 19, 2016
- ↑ Commission on Presidential Debates, "Commission on Presidential Debates Announces Format for 2016 General Election Debates," July 7, 2016
- ↑ Politico, "Johnson and Stein fail to make cut for first presidential debate," September 16, 2016
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 CPD, "An Overview," accessed August 26, 2015
- ↑ Commission on Presidential Debates, "Commission on Presidential Debates Announces Polls to be used in 2016 Candidate Selection Criteria," August 15, 2016
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ CNN, "Hillary Clinton prepares for unpredictable Donald Trump at debate," September 20, 2016
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 CNN, "Debate prep reveals clash of styles for Clinton, Trump," August 31, 2016
- ↑ NBC News, "Clinton Preparing for 'Different Trumps' at First Debate," September 21, 2016
- ↑ CNN, "Campaign manager: Clinton preparing to fact-check Trump during debate," September 21, 2016
- ↑ YouTube, "Donald Trump Bill O'Reilly FULL Interview - September 19, 2016 - Fox News - The O'Reilly Factor," September 19, 2016
- ↑ The New York Times, "Hillary Clinton Piles Up Research in Bid to Needle Donald Trump at First Debate," August 29, 2016
- ↑ The Washington Post, "Inside debate prep: Clinton’s careful case vs. Trump’s ‘WrestleMania,’" August 27, 2016
- ↑ Politico, "Trump campaign manager knocks Clinton as too 'lawyerly' for debates," September 21, 2016
- ↑ Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedclinton - ↑ Revolution, "Ron Klain," accessed August 25, 2016
- ↑ 18.0 18.1 Politico, "Hillary Clinton's secret Iran man," April 3, 2015
- ↑ 19.0 19.1 19.2 The White House, "Vice President Biden Announces Jake Sullivan as New National Security Advisor," February 26, 2013
- ↑ Boies, Schiller and Flexner LLP, "Karen Dunn," accessed August 25, 2016
- ↑ Williams & Connolly, "Robert Barnett," accessed December 30, 2015
- ↑ Politico, "The power players behind Hillary Clinton's campaign," June 30, 2015
- ↑ Washington Post, "Hillary Clinton recruits chief strategist, media adviser for 2016 effort," January 13, 2015
- ↑ MSNBC, "Emerging Clinton campaign draws heavily from Obama alumni," January 14, 2015
- ↑ New York Times, "For Hillary Clinton, John Podesta Is a Right Hand With a Punch," February 15, 2015
- ↑ The Washington Post, "Center for American Progress, poised to wield influence over 2016, reveals its top donors," January 21, 2015
- ↑ The Office of the President-Elect, "Obama-Biden Transition Project," accessed June 18, 2015
- ↑ Georgetown Law, "John Podesta," accessed June 19, 2015
- ↑ New York Times, "Connecting the Dots Behind the 2016 Presidential Candidates," June 8, 2015
- ↑ New York Times, "Obama Seldom Asks His Pollster to Play the Role of an Oracle," February 3, 2008
- ↑ Government Printing Office, "U.S. Government Manual," accessed March 22, 2016
- ↑ 32.0 32.1 Politico, "Jennifer Palmieri to join White House staff," December 5, 2011
- ↑ 33.0 33.1 Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedspar - ↑ Beacon Global Strategies, "Philippe Reines," accessed September 25, 2016
- ↑ Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namednixon - ↑ The Washington Post, "Cruz super PAC launches seven-figure, nationwide ad campaign," August 4, 2015
- ↑ Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedwrestle - ↑ 38.0 38.1 Laura Ingraham, "About," accessed August 30, 2016
- ↑ Los Angeles Times, "Who is Steve Bannon, Donald Trump's new campaign CEO?" August 17, 2016
- ↑ Bloomberg, "This Man Is the Most Dangerous Political Operative in America," October 8, 2015
- ↑ Government Accountability Institute, "Team," accessed October 8, 2015
- ↑ Politico, "The power players behind Ted Cruz's campaign," April 20, 2015
- ↑ Bloomberg, "Trump Hires Ex-Cruz Aide as Communications Adviser," June 27, 2016
- ↑ New York Times, "Connecting the Dots Behind the 2016 Candidates," May 17, 2015
- ↑ The American Presidency Project, "Press Release - Top Sanford Aide Joins Giuliani Campaign," accessed May 26, 2015
- ↑ The Washington Post, "The first Trump-Clinton presidential debate transcript, annotated," September 26, 2016
- ↑ The New York Times, "By the Numbers: Butting In, and Going On, Trump Dominates," September 27, 2016
