Two politicians vying to become the second-most-important man in
the country for the next four years debated Tuesday night to an
expected audience in the tens of millions.
But despite the fevered pitch of political passion among
potential voters in the waning days of the 2004 campaign season,
the vice presidential debate may have relatively little influence
on the election outcome.
“It’s rare that they have any impact,” said
Sheldon Kamieniecki, a professor of political science at the
University of Southern California. “Maybe a difference of a
quarter or half of a percent,” he said.
“Often vice presidential candidates cannot even carry
their own state,” he added.
But vice presidential candidates are not necessarily meant to
bring in the votes. As Douglas Strand, a lecturer in political
science at University of California, Berkeley, said, vice
presidential candidates tend to play the role of the “hatchet
man” ““ the one who can attack the opposition while the
presidential candidate stays out of the fray.
“They can say things that the presidential candidate might
not be able to say,” he said.
Also, vice presidential candidates can spread the message of a
party to a wider audience by simply doubling the size of a ticket,
Strand said. Vice presidential candidates often play a less direct
role in bringing in votes.
Strand said this year could be different, though, because unlike
previous candidates, Cheney has “a heavy influence in the
oval office on a day-to-day basis.”
“Dick Cheney will be, in part, judged as a
president,” he said.
But, Kamieniecki said, the decided-upon seated format for the
debate may marginalize the directness by which the candidates
appeal to voters.
For this debate, incumbent Vice President Dick Cheney and his
Democratic challenger John Edwards were sitting at a table rather
than standing at podiums. This was also the format in the 2000 vice
presidential debate between Cheney and Joseph Lieberman ““ a
debate considered to have been very subdued.
The Democrats preferred a format in which the two would be
standing because a seated debate neutralizes height differential
and body language ““ areas where Edwards is believed to have
the advantage. But the Bush/Cheney campaign “insisted
on” a seated format, said Brian Richardson, a spokesman for
the Democratic National Committee.
“Standing up (Cheney) has at some times appeared
stiff,” Strand said. “I think (sitting) will help avoid
that weakness.”
Kamieniecki said the neutralizing effects of the debate format
will also neutralize the effect on voters despite the increased
attention to this presidential election over previous elections. He
said this format “doesn’t really allow for a real
debate.”
After numerous attempts Tuesday, the Bush/Cheney campaign could
not be reached for comment.
The Democrats hope Edwards can build on the momentum generated
by John Kerry after his debate with Bush Thursday that put the two
in a virtual dead heat among potential voters. The Democrats have
downplayed the role of Edwards in the debate and have tried to
position him as the underdog in this debate.
“John Edwards has never been in a one-on-one political
debate before,” Richardson said. “Going in, Cheney has
the advantage.”
A poll released Monday by the Annenberg Public Policy Center
showed the American public has a slightly more favorable view of
Edwards than Cheney. But Edwards’ unfavorable rating has
increased more than his favorable rating since the last Annenberg
survey in early July.
Strand said the unfavorable ratings for Cheney could have an
impact on the Bush/Cheney ticket, as vice presidential candidates
may have more of a chance of hurting a campaign than helping
it.
One of the clearest examples, Kamieniecki said, was in 1972 when
George McGovern chose Tom Eagleton as his running mate. Eagleton
later admitted to psychological problems that caused him to become
the first vice presidential candidate to withdraw from his
candidacy.
On the other hand, Kamieniecki said, one of the best vice
presidential candidates still did not get elected. Lloyd Bentsen,
the running mate of Michael Dukakis, was considered to have
performed very well in his debate against Dan Quayle.
“Maybe Bentsen should have been running for president
rather than vice president,” Kamieniecki said.