Essay: Do political debates still matter to voters?

Every campaign season, we hear the same question: Do political debates actually matter?

And the honest answer is … it depends.

Before we go any further, it’s worth saying something out loud that we don’t acknowledge nearly enough: The skills required to campaign well and the skills required to govern well are not always the same. Some excellent public servants are not natural performers. Some excellent performers are not natural public servants. But debates are part of campaigning, so let’s talk about them.

Contributed

/

Majority in the Middle

At their best, debates — or forums, or conversations, whatever the format — help voters learn something real. They show judgment. They show how a candidate responds under pressure. They give us a sense of how someone thinks and what they think.

But debates can also be pure performance. A string of rehearsed talking points. A polished answer that never quite addresses the question asked. And at their worst, they can be painful to watch, exposing a candidate’s lack of subject-matter knowledge or their discomfort with the format.

One of the most frustrating moments for voters is the “pivot” — when a candidate is asked a direct question and responds with something completely unrelated. It’s especially irritating when the questions come from the audience. In my opinion, if constituents take the time to submit something they genuinely want answered, they deserve a real response, not a detour into whatever message the candidate wants to push that day.

Increasingly, candidates have decided debates aren’t worth the risk. And politically, they haven’t paid much of a price for skipping them. Social media gives candidates direct access to voters. They can control their message, avoid uncomfortable moments and eliminate the chance of handing their opponent something that could go viral.

Minnesota has seen this firsthand.

In 2018, Sen. Tina Smith skipped a major TV news debate. In 2022, Gov. Tim Walz did the same. The reasons varied — not wanting to “platform” an opponent or an unfriendly host, not wanting to lean into a format they’re not good at or simply deciding the downside of messing up on camera outweighs the upside. And nationally, we’ve all seen how a bad debate performance can shape a campaign more than a good one can.

Most candidates try to avoid what they see as “unfriendly hosts.” But I see that dynamic differently. At the legislative level, many debates are organized by the League of Women Voters, often with local partners like chambers of commerce or other civic groups. The LWV is legally nonpartisan, but like any civic organization, its volunteers are human beings with their own perspectives.

No host — and no media outlet — is ever completely free of bias or the perception of bias. Candidates worry about framing, tone or the slant of the questions. But imperfect hosts shouldn’t erase the value of a debate opportunity.

Now, this doesn’t mean candidates should accept every debate invitation. Campaign hours are limited, and priorities matter. But saying no to every debate isn’t a good decision. In this divisive political environment, sure, debates can feel like a trap. But at their best, debates aren’t about the host at all. They’re about the audience.

Debates are about respecting voters enough to show up. They’re about articulating values and ideas — even, and maybe especially, when the audience doesn’t share them. They’re about stepping outside siloed social media feeds. They’re about believing in the process enough to participate in it. And they’re about practicing a skill we claim to want more of in politics: sitting next to an opponent and disagreeing without dehumanizing.

Come to think of it, all of those things could also be said about the willingness to run for office in the first place.

So, do debates matter?

They do if we treat them as more than a stage. They do if candidates engage honestly with the voters in the room. They do if voters give candidates credit for an honest — even imperfect — performance.

And they do if we remember that democracy isn’t strengthened by avoiding one another. It’s strengthened by showing up.

KAXE is partnering with Majority in the Middle for election coverage, civic engagement and outreach. Majority in the Middle is a Minnesota nonprofit described as an objective, outside force for systemic change to improve transparency, participation and civility within political and civic life.

Listen to Executive Director Shannon Watson's essay above.

Find more information on November 2026 elections from the KAXE news team here.