Skip to footer

Presidential debate: 7 defining moments in history (+video)

From Ronald Reagan’s one-liner, “There you go again,” to Al Gore’s heavy sighs and eye rolls, zingers and mannerisms can define a presidential debate even more than the candidates’ positions on critical issues. Here is a look back at seven defining debate moments.

1988: George H.W. Bush vs. Michael Dukakis

Often viewed as a cold technocrat, Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis (D) missed a chance to show some emotion during his Oct. 13, 1988, presidential debate with Vice President George H.W. Bush (R) – and gave the second debate of the campaign cycle its defining moment.

Moderator Bernard Shaw of CNN opened the debate with a controversial question regarding Mr. Dukakis’s stand against the death penalty.

“Governor, if Kitty Dukakis were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?” Mr. Shaw asked.

“No, I don't, Bernard,” replied Dukakis, without a pause.  “And I think you know that I've opposed the death penalty during all of my life. I don't see any evidence that it's a deterrent, and I think there are better and more effective ways to deal with violent crime.”

He continued the answer by describing measures he took as governor to lessen violent crime, an austere response that came across to many viewers as cold and uncaring. His approval ratings dropped 7 points that night. 

“Dukakis seemed flustered by it and, instead of saying 'I'd kill him if I could get my hands on him,' there was some kind of politically correct answer,” Bush told Mr. Lehrer in the 2008 PBS interview on presidential debates. “And I think that hurt him.”

4 of 7
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.