Second, the debates allow voters to judge the temperament, knowledge, communication skills, and personalities of the candidates. First, they probably do not change the minds of a substantial number of voters, as suggested by scholarly studies. Debates reinforce existing candidate preferences for most voters. However, in a close, dramatic election, even the shift of a few percentage points caused by debate performances could spell the difference between victory or defeat. Third, critics argue that these meetings are not true debates, in that neither candidate can directly question the other.
True spontaneity is lost.
First, a challenger hopes that he will demonstrate presidential qualities by doing exceptionally well when confronted by a presidential incumbent in the debates. He wants the incumbent to perform poorly. But Senator Bob Dole did not attain this objective in 1996 against incumbent President Bill Clinton, nor did Walter Mondale against the telegenic Ronald Reagan, President in 1984. Second, neither candidate wants to commit a serious error in judgement or misstatement on national television. Hence, Ford's statement in the 1976 debate that Eastern Europe was not under the domination of the Soviet Union clearly hurt his re-election chances.