at the first presidential general election debate.

This is one of the most watched television programs of every election cycle, with many

viewers seeing it as a potential “game changer” in a close race.

But do presidential debates actually matter?

Well, according to most political scientists, not really.

Multiple studies of polling from before and after general election debates showed little

or no change in the opinions of voters.

In one particularly comprehensive study, researchers took every publicly available poll from presidential

elections between 1952 and 2008, only to find one candidate who saw significantly less support

after the debate: Jimmy Carter in 1976.

Ironically, Carter went on to win the 1976 election against Gerald Ford.

This rang true even in debates where a candidate’s performance was so objectively good or bad,

that people thought it decided the election.

One example is the following election, when Carter was running against the widely popular

Ronald Reagan.

At the debates, Reagan made a game out of pointing out Carter’s repetitiveness with

the comeback “there you go again”.

It quickly became the defining phrase of the election, and Reagan went on to win by a landslide.

But experts say Reagan would have won either way, as, for the most part, support for both

candidates remained unchanged after these supposedly “game-changing” debates.

Although there’s little evidence that debates can outright decide presidential elections,

they appear to be able to nudge polls by a few percentage points.

But, researchers say this shift has less to do with a candidate’s substantive talking

points, and more to do to with how they come off to viewers.

For instance in the first televised debate in 1960, John F Kennedy stared directly into

the camera as he answered questions, coming off as confident and sincere.

Whereas his opponent, Richard Nixon, frequently glanced off to the side at reporters, appeared

unshaven, and looked nervous.

It was even alleged that most TV viewers declared Kennedy the clear winner, whereas those who

tuned in via radio preferred Nixon.

The media also plays a key role in shaping the outcome of debates.

News outlets will often analyze each candidate’s performance, sometimes corresponding with

their own biases, and declaring one ‘winner’.

Studies show that an overwhelming majority of viewers will side with whichever media

outlet they are tuned into.

Nevertheless, debates are crucial, as they are essentially the first comprehensive look

at a nominee’s political platform.

So why don’t they change minds?

Well, according to some political scientists, debates tend to attract politically inclined

viewers who have likely already decided who they’re voting for.

It also doesn’t help that debates air so close to election day that in some states,

early in-person voting will have already begun.

Okay, but this is 2016, and if there’s one overarching theme of this election, it’s

that the status quo doesn’t mean much.

What’s more, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are on radically different ideological platforms,

and are, according to polls, equally unlikable.

For the millions of Americans who can’t fathom voting for either, these debates could

be a deciding factor… or maybe not.

                     Nonetheless, being good at debating in real

life is a pretty huge advantage.

Being able to prove your point, and convince others can get you pretty far ahead.

Learn how to do that in

this episode of DNews!