What do Clinton and Trump need to accomplish in the debates?

More than 85 percent of likely voters say their minds are completely made up, according to a recent poll. About 13 percent said they were undecided.

J. David Ake/AP
Construction crews hang part of the set as preparations continue for Monday's presidential debate between Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton and Republican candidate Donald Trump, Saturday, Sept. 24, 2016, at Hofstra University in Hempstead, N.Y.

Donald Trump needs to prove to voters that he has the policy depth and gravitas to serve as commander in chief. Hillary Clinton needs to connect with Americans who question her trustworthiness and likeability.

In an election year that has upended political convention, the candidates' best opportunity to conquer their weaknesses will come in the most traditional of campaign forums: Monday's 90-minute, prime-time debate.

Both campaigns expect a record-setting television audience for the high-stakes showdown, which could help tip the balance in a tight White House race.

The visuals alone will be striking as the candidates step behind their podiums at Hofstra University in suburban New York. Mrs. Clinton will be the first woman to take the stage in a presidential general election debate. Mr. Trump has spent years on Americans' television screens as a reality show host, but it can still be jarring to see him at politics' upper echelons.

As The Christian Science Monitor's Gretel Kaufmann reported on Thursday:

Still, when sharing the stage with a candidate known for his showmanship, Mrs. Clinton may have a tougher job ahead of her than Trump, suggests Craig LaMay, associate professor at Northwestern University and co-author of the book "Inside the Presidential Debates." 

"My view is you can't win [a debate] but you sure can lose one," Professor LaMay explains in a phone interview with the Monitor.... He cites as examples Al Gore, who sighed repeatedly at the podium during a debate against George W. Bush in 2000, and Barack Obama in his first debate against Mitt Romney in 2012, at which he appeared "unprepared and uninterested." 

Six weeks from Election Day, and with advance voting already underway, the opening debate is one of the few opportunities left for the candidates to motivate supporters and sway a narrow band of undecided voters. According to a new Associated Press-Gfk poll, more than 85 percent of likely voters backing Clinton or Trump say their minds are completely made up. About 13 percent said they were undecided.

The candidates' preparation has been a microcosm of their sharply different approaches to politics and presumably, the presidency.

The Democratic nominee has spent weeks with advisers, taking full days away from campaign travel to dig through briefing books, practicing to pounce if Trump makes false statements, and steeling herself for the deeply personal attacks he has threatened.

Longtime Clinton aide Philippe Reines is playing Trump in mock debates, according to a person familiar with the preparations who was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and insisted on anonymity. Mr. Reines is a combative political operative who is deeply loyal to Clinton.

Former President Bill Clinton has sat in on some sessions, offering advice from his own White House debates.

Trump has eschewed traditional debate preparations, but has held midflight policy discussions with a rotating cast of advisers. He's also spent numerous Sundays batting around ideas with aides, including ousted Fox president Roger Ailes.

The Republican businessman's loose approach is potentially risky, given that he is new to many policy issues expected to come up during the debate. But supporters say he will compensate by being quick on his feet and point to his experience at performing under pressure.

"Imagine the practice and the training of 13 years of reality television on 'The Apprentice' and then imagine Hillary's experience reading hundreds of papers," said Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker and a Trump adviser who has been talking through policy with the candidate in recent days.

Clinton aides fear Trump will indeed be judged more for his performance than his grasp of the numerous challenges that pass across a president's desk. They've been flummoxed by Trump's ability to sail through the campaign without fleshing out many policy positions and glossing over past statements that he no longer views as politically palatable.

On Friday, the Clinton campaign released 19 pages of what they called Trump's "seven deadly lies," including his false assertion that he opposed the Iraq war from the start.

"Even if he meets some kind of lowered bar of being semi-coherent and not having any outbursts, it's hard to imagine he'll avoid his own propensity for lying," said Brian Fallon, Clinton's campaign spokesperson.

Asked whether Clinton herself planned to call Trump out in the debate if he tries to lie about his past statements, Fallon said, "I don't think she would let anything like that pass."

People familiar with Clinton's preparations say she has been working through answers to questions that hit at her lack of trustworthiness in the eyes of many Americans, a problem that has dogged her throughout the campaign. Supporters cringed during a candidate forum earlier this month when Clinton was pressed about her email use at the State Department and became defensive, rather than apologizing and trying to move on quickly.

Clinton has debated more than 30 times at the presidential level, including several one-on-one debates with Barack Obama in 2008 and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in 2016. But this will be her first presidential debate against a candidate from an opposing party, which Democrats say will give her far more latitude in drawing a contrast and defending herself.

"It's a lot more comfortable running against people in the other party than it is debating in the primary," said Anita Dunn, who worked on debate preparations with Mr. Obama. "The differences don't have to be manufactured. The differences exist."

Trump had an uneven record during the Republican debates, sometimes controlling the crowded contests and other times fading into the background. He flipped back and forth between being bombastic and trying to act restrained.

Trump's less-than-restrained side was on display Saturday as he took to Twitter to criticize Clinton's decision to ask businessman Mark Cuban — a frequent Trump critic — to be one of her guests at the debate. The Republican nominee suggested he might put Gennifer Flowers, a woman who had a relationship with Bill Clinton, "right alongside" Mr. Cuban.

Trump misspelled Ms. Flowers' first name in his original tweet, then sent a corrected version minutes later.

If nothing else, the debates will give viewers a chance to see the two candidates' temperaments on display.

As the Monitor's Peter Grier noted this week:

For supporters of Donald Trump, temperament remains their biggest worry. Thirty-four percent of Trump voters say his temperament and unpredictability concerns them. For supporters of Hillary Clinton, overall temperament is not the issue so much as a single characteristic. Seventeen percent say they’re unhappy with what they see as her dishonesty and secrecy.


But overall, all the very best presidents – the indispensables – all have had “first class temperaments,” Greenberg adds. They have had a certain sense of equanimity and confidence that keeps them from being buffeted by bad press or low public ratings. They’ve had a certain joie de vivre that kept them from wallowing in anger or resentment. Liking people is important. So is resilience in the face of adversity.


Associated Press writers Ken Thomas and Catherine Lucey in White Plains, New York, and AP Polling Editor Emily Swanson in Washington contributed to this report.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

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.

QR Code to What do Clinton and Trump need to accomplish in the debates?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today