Melissa Harris-Perry: I'm Melissa Harris-Perry, and this is The Takeaway. The first votes in the 2022 midterm election, they were cast almost five months ago when Alabama held the nation's earliest primary contest way back in May. It's all going to be over in less than a month when voters cast their final ballots of this midterm season on November 8th. In the months between filing deadlines, primary battles, general election campaigns, and election night announcements, millions of Americans make thousands of choices. They decide the leadership of American counties, cities, and states.

They choose the entire US House and about a third of the US Senate. These are the choices that shape the future of our country. How do folks who are living their lives, paying their bills, working their jobs, rearing their kids, how do they make all these big decisions? There's all those shiny flyers that show up in your mailbox. There's radio, TV, and internet [unintelligible 00:01:05] and there are debates. Like last night, when US Senate candidates Democrat Tim Ryan and Republican JD Vance squared off in the first and only debate of the US Senate race in Ohio. Theirs was an exchange that covered well-trodden ground from this year.

Democrat Tim Ryan: JD Vance, he supports a national abortion ban in which he wants women have to get a passport and go to Canada. We've got to have some moderation on this issue. He's got a very extreme position.

Republican JD Vance: He talks about wanting to support a stronger border. He talks about wanting to be bipartisan and get things done. Tim, you've been in Congress for 20 years and the border problem has got worse and worse and worse.

Melissa Harris-Perry: These days, there are far fewer debates to help voters decide. In fact, a new analysis from the Brookings Institution finds that the number of debates in the five most competitive Senate races, they've dropped from 17 races back in 2010 to just 7 planned for this year. Is the great debate a thing of the past and do the debates that are still happening make any difference? With me now is Joel Payne, CBS News political contributor. Joel, welcome back to The Takeaway.

Joel Payne: Good to be with you, Melissa.

Melissa Harris-Perry: Also with this is Brendan Buck, partner at Seven Letter, a Washington and Boston-based public affairs firm, and formerly a senior staffer for House speakers Paul Ryan and John Boehner. It is always great to have you, Brendan.

Brendan Buck: Hi, Melissa. Thank you.

Melissa Harris-Perry: All right. Here's the big picture. Joel, we'll start with you. What are you seeing in the debates that are actually happening?

Joel Payne: I'm seeing a lot and it's so funny because people like to tell the story of any election cycle, particularly midterms as like one national story and it's not. It's a series of local laboratories and I've boiled it down to four key issues that I'm looking at. It's four Cs: candidates, choice, cost, and crime. If you want a quick dummies guide to the midterms, that's what it is for me. It's the poor candidates that my Republican friends like Brendan have chosen on their side that have made this more competitive than it should be.

It's the issue of choice that have given Democrats the type of boost with enthusiasm that they would've needed in this type of cycle to push back on the wins of history. It's cost which are really hurting Democrats all across the country, a difficult economy. I think the fourth C is an emerging thing that's really concerning to a lot of Democrats that are paying attention right now and it's crime. If Mandela Barnes loses in Wisconsin, it'll be because of crime. If John Federman loses in Pennsylvania, it'll be because of crime. Republicans have frankly decided to amp up the volume on that issue, particularly in the suburbs, and I think it's something Democrats really have to address. There's a lot going on but those are the things I'm looking at.

Melissa Harris-Perry: Brendan, is that also what you're hearing and seeing in these debates the ones that are actually happening between these candidates? Is it about candidate quality, choice from a reproductive justice perspective, costs as in our inflation, and crime as in our perception that in some cases reality that crime has increased?

Brendan Buck: Yes. I think each one of these debates is an opportunity for each party to pick which one of those they want the election to be about. As Joel lightly said, Republicans are increasingly hitting crime as a top issue. We've talked for months and months and months about cost of living and that is certainly going to be a top issue. Republicans are banking on that in crime being what this election is about and Democrats want this to be about abortion. Elections are typically only about one or two things and it's a fight for what voters are actually going to cast their ballot on.

I talked to somebody who was polling a lot of house races and he found that the swing voters that are actually going to decide this election, they actually side with Democrats on abortion and they think that the Dobbs' decision was wrong and they're worried about it. In their polling, they are seeing that by two to one, those voters are prioritizing economic issues in their vote. They're casting their vote based on cost of living, even though they agree with Democrats on those issues. That's the real contrast that exists. These debates provide an opportunity for candidates to set the frame of the election.

Melissa Harris-Perry: Do they though, Brendan-- This is, I think for me, really the thing I'm trying to get at. I buy that it's about these issues and I buy that it's very much about the capacity of a candidate and a campaign to make the campaign about the contest. I guess for me, the real question is are the debates where that's happening? Is it that people are tuning in? Particularly not just folks, because we know that if you're strongly partisan you've already made the decision.

It's just a question of if you're going to turn out to vote. For the undecided who are tuning in, are they getting their popcorn, sitting down to their local public television station watching it, and saying, "You know what? This debate is the thing that has moved me"? Joel, do you have a sense is that framing happening in these contests between the candidates on stage?

Joel Payne: I think that this has really shifted in what I would call the more recent political cycles. I don't know if I think debates are game-changers. I think they're flashpoints and I think that they're a check engine light, a temperature reading, and they may reflect where a race is. I don't know how many voters are tuning in and saying, "Wow, Tim Ryan really outdueled JD Vance on that one point. That has made my decision for me." I think it's a part of a narrative. It's a part of a collective storyline that campaigns hope to tell. What you hope for as a candidate is that you find a moment that you can really exploit.

Someone gives a bad answer on an issue that you know is already on the minds of voters and you can play that over and over and over again. If you really look at it, that happens pretty rarely. I know in our minds it can seem like it happens all the time, but it really doesn't. It's George Bush Senior looking at his watch on stage and looking in considerate on the economy. It's Donald Trump looming over Hillary Clinton on stage. It's someone giving a bad answer on crime like Michael Dukakis. We glamorize those moments. Those are pretty rare and those are increasingly rare, I think, in the last few years of the political cycle.

Melissa Harris-Perry: All right. Brendan, almost every example that Joel just gave us is from a presidential debate, not exclusively but almost entirely. I really am wondering again, when we think about for example Vance and Ryan last night in Ohio, going ahead and going toe to toe, and I got to say it seemed less exciting than their Twitter battles.

Brendan Buck: Yes. Look, debates matter less than they ever have and I don't think we can dispute that. You know you can tell that by the fact that there are fewer debates than there used to be. That's for a few reasons. One I think you were getting at we are much more tribal. People have already made up their mind. There are a lot fewer swing votes than there were to be decided at a debate. Secondly, campaigns don't need debates to reach people in the way that they used to.

This used to be, like you said, a big moment, where everybody sat down and said, "Okay, now I'm going to decide." If you are a voter who is not made up their mind, the campaigns at least know that and they know how to reach you and they know how to reach you with messages that are going to persuade you to turn out. Most campaigns these days are much more built around motivation.

Getting voters to that they know are on their side to turn out then they are about persuasion, convincing people that they should vote for them in the first place. You show up because you have to, there's an expectation, it's a bad look if you don't. Most campaigns are just glad to get through a debate not have one of those moments that Joel is talking about and move back onto the things that they want to focus on.

Melissa Harris-Perry: All right. Now you've laid out some more hypotheses for me. Joel, let's walk through these. One is this hypothesis that you got to show up because if you don't, it's a bad look. I'm wondering if even that is still true. Certainly, what we've seen in this election cycle is a whole lot of candidates saying, "You know what? Actually, I'm not coming.

Reporter 1: Rafael Warnock has accepted three invitations to debate his opponent, Herschel Walker.

Reporter 2: Yet, Herschel Walker still refuses to agree to any debates.

Interviewer: You're having an intention of dodging debate?

Herschel Walker: Oh, no, I don't dodge anything.

Melissa Harris-Perry: I think Herschel Walker is going to clearly at the top of that.

Joel Payne: We're in the post-shame era, not just in politics but in society, but definitely in politics. I don't think you can verbally bully somebody into a debate maybe the way you could 10, 15, 20 years ago. When you do, even if they don't-- I don't think JB Vance really covered himself in glory in his recent debate. I don't get the sense that Herschel Walker is going to put on a tour de diforce in his debate coming up in Georgia when he and Senator Warnock talk soon. I think that there's so much tribalism already baked in.

Again, unless you say something that really, really goes against where they are, and even in those cases-- I mean, look Herschel Walker essentially is going against Republican Orthodoxy in his personal behavior, and the voters they are telling you they don't care. I think that that is a symptom of we're in this post-shame era. I don't necessarily think so. I don't really think you can bully someone into a debate and then use that to really work against them. I think we're a little bit beyond that. By the way, I don't know if that necessarily is a good thing for constituents or for voters when they're trying to make the best decision.

Melissa Harris-Perry: [00:10:28] All right. Let's dig into exactly that space then as we are thinking about what's happening in Georgia. First, we've got Herschel Walker saying, "No, we're not going to debate." Then we are going to have a debate. This idea of going against the personal orthodoxy or going against the Republican Orthodoxy in personal behavior. Of course, I might trace that back. I'd be interested to see how you'd think about this, Brendan.

There's a moment on the floor of the Republican National Convention in 2008 with Sarah Palin as the vice-presidential nominee. Her teen daughter had been discovered to be pregnant and not yet married. I can remember I was there, and they had to say, "We love teen moms." In some ways, consistent with a Republican Orthodoxy that is pro-life. It also certainly went against the narrative of family values that we'd heard prior.

Then to the extent that maybe that had sloughed off a bit, certainly by the time we get to 2016 and we're looking at the actions, personal behaviors of the man who becomes president, Donald Trump. I'm wondering if even that notion within the Republican Party right now allows that Herschel Walker actually can't lose this debate. That as long as he shows up, he has to win.

Brendan Buck: Well, he certainly lowered the expectations dramatically. I think Herschel Walker is just a unique case, where this is someone not just new to politics, but real questions about his capacity to handle issues, discuss basic matters that you'll need to be able to discuss as a candidate. He has said himself to lower expectations that he's not very smart and this is not going to go well for him.

Just showing up, I think, it's easy to say that that's enough, but I don't know that it is. If he goes out on the stage and completely embarrasses himself, not understanding questions and saying bizarre things, like he's been known to say on the campaign trail, that could hurt him because this is a debate where I think people do want to actually see what this person actually is like.

They've heard so much about him and his past, and at this point, Republicans are rallying around him because they have no real other choice. While we're pretty tribal in Georgia in particular, we know that this is a state that is in transition. There are a lot of voters who used to vote Republican who are now starting to vote democratic, and he needs those people. If he embarrasses himself on a debate stage, I think it actually could matter. I think most debates probably don't change much, but this one actually has pretty high stakes for me.

Melissa Harris-Perry: All right. Let's take a quick break with Joel and Brendan. We're going to be right back and talking more about debates, whether or not they matter in midterm 2022.

[music]

You're back with The Takeaway. I'm Melissa Harris-Perry. I'm still here with two fantastic guests. We've got Joel Payne from CBS News, he's a political contributor, and Brendan Buck, a former senior staffer with Representative Paul Ryan and John Baner. We've been talking about this question of debates and whether or not they'll make a difference in the 2022 midterms. All right. Let's talk about the Arizona debate. This question of a debate that wasn't really supposed to be a debate, and then one of the candidates saying, "No, you're going to debate me." What in the world is going on in Arizona?

Joel Payne: Well, Melissa, I guess what I would say about Arizona is this: Masters is the one that has the pressure on change the trajectory of the race. I don't believe that happened. Look, there's going to be a lot of flash points that his campaign tries to point out, but I'll just tell you, if the key issues there are do independence like Mark Kelly. I think they still like Mark Kelly after that debate. Do voters on the Republican side think that Blake Masters is just weird? Has he diffused that issue? Not really.

Also, is he out of step with the Arizona electorate on the issue of abortion? I'd argue even kind of after that debate, Masters has said some comments about how he wanted to remove the standard on Griswold and the Supreme Court case of Griswold making contraception illegal. I would say that, again, we talked about this before, these debates are really flashpoints and they're rare to change the trajectory. I don't think anything about the trajectory of that race changed with how Blake Masters performed and how Mark Kelly performed.

Melissa Harris-Perry: I want to do one other Arizona race, and this is the race for governor. Katie Hobbs, the Democratic candidate for governor who said she would not debate her opponent, Kari Lake.

Katie Hobbs: What I have been focused on is opportunities like this where they can see us back-to-back and hear directly from us about the issues that are important to Arizonans and how we would govern without a circus like she created during the GOP Republican primary. I have no desire to be a part of the spectacle that she's looking to create because that doesn't do any service to the voters of Arizona to hear from us where we stand on the issues and how we would govern.

Melissa Harris-Perry: Hobbs and her opponent, Lake, did this town hall. They weren't supposed to appear together, but Lake actually sat on the front row when Hobbs took the stage. Lake was booed. She left the seat. It got wild. What was going on with that, Brendan?

Brendan Buck: Well, one of the tactics you often see is if you are the candidate who is leading a campaign, you have lot less incentives to debate at all. I think that's what you're seeing here, is somebody who thinks that they can win without ever having to legitimize their campaign. Also, Kari Lake has shown herself to be-- I don't want to use the word.

She's quite eccentric as a candidate, says lots of bizarre things, conspiracy theories, and her Democratic opponent, I understand, does not want to be put in a position of having to respond to nonsense.

I can understand why she wouldn't want to debate, but you know, that's also, again, like you said, tough. If you're the one saying you don't want to debate, typically what you have is this back-and-forth cat-and-mouse,"We'll debate this way. Well, I'll do it at this time." Usually, they come to some type of accommodation. It's rare that they can't actually figure it out. This is a situation where you've got one sort of kooky candidate and one candidate who is ahead in the races and doesn't feel like they need to give that person any platform to come back.

Melissa Harris-Perry: Is it possible to win a debate or can you only lose one?

Brendan Buck: I think you could only lose one. You have much more to lose than you do to gain in a debate. Joel talked about all the examples. It's rare to have somebody absolutely dominate someone so much that it changes the race for them, but it is much more common to have somebody fall on their face and disqualify themselves. Like I said earlier, you really just want to get through one of these debates, survive, move on, maybe have a line that you can use on the debate stage or on the campaign trail, but after that, you want to forget about it.

Joel Payne: Melissa, there is just some rules to political gravity that apply here. I want to go back to your particular question about Lake and Hobbs. To answer your question, you just asked, "Can you lose them, or can you win them?" I think they're a lot easier to lose than they are to win. I think that's right. I agree with Brendan's approach there. I have these rules of political gravity. They're like Joel's rules of politics, which may or may not be able to be used and replicated by others.

Folks are welcome to test the patent on them. One of them is, I think you have to be seen by the electorate and by constituents as wanting to win. I think part of wanting to win is wanting to get into the fight. I actually don't think it's a good look for Katie Hobbs to back off of that debate with Kari Lake. Yes, Kari Lake is kooky. Kari Lake is also pretty charismatic, former TV host, and somebody who-- I think it's interesting as much as in that senate race that I talked about earlier. Mark Kelly is like the candidate that's controlling the tempo.

I'd say that Kari Lake is controlling the tempo on that governor's race. I think if Katie Hobbs wants to beat her, she's got to take it. I don't know if I would trust a poll that says that Katie Hobbs is ahead right now. I think if you're Kari Lake, you can easily lean into Katie Hobbs for not being competitive and not wanting to go for it. I just don't think that's a good look. I don't think that's something that wears well with voters and with constituents. One other thing I would point out too is the strategic placement on the calendar of when these debates are happening. We talk about election day as this diffuse thing. It's going to be in November, it's in a couple of weeks. Election day is starting next week-- [crosstalk]

Melissa Harris-Perry: Well, People are voting right now.

Joel Payne: [inaudible 00:18:53] places. That's right. I think that that's an important thing to factor in as well. I think these debates are strategically placed on the calendar around early voting times and early registration periods. I do think folks always have to remember that is like a debate might be happening two days before early voting starts in a county, or mail-in voting opens up in a county. I think that's an important thing to take into account as well.

Melissa Harris-Perry: All right. Thanks so much, guys. I hope you'll come back, and we'll take a look at how all of these debates, so many coming up in the next couple of weeks, have or don't have an influence on this election cycle. Joel Payne, CBS News, political contributor, and Brendan Buck, partner at Seven Letter. Thank you both for being here today.

Joel Payne: Thanks for having me.

Brendan Buck: Good talking with you.

[music]

Copyright © 2024 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.