Presidential Debate Analysis

Words: 440
Pages: 2

Political debates sometimes involve the collaboration between two or more parties with similar ideas or sometimes different. This could also be seen sometimes as even a competition of sorts as people compare ideas and people judge to see who is right and wrong. Most debates always draw out to resemble things like this, not excluding the presidential debates. These debates can be seen as a collaboration of candidates for presidency, but to me seems to be more of a competition, as the candidates then compare each other to themselves sometimes, but in a way that is hard to notice, sort of between the lines. “Well, the resurgence of Russia is one of the central issues that we're going to have to deal with in the next presidency. And for the most …show more content…
That I don't think is an example of "speaking softly." To which John McCain replied, “Not true. Not true. I have, obviously, supported those efforts that the United States had to go in militarily and I have opposed that I didn't think so. I understand what it's like to send young American's in harm's way. I say -- I was joking with a veteran -- I hate to even go into this. I was joking with an old veteran friend, who joked with me, about Iran.” This can clearly be viewed as the competitive side of the debates, and although there are in fact some very good points brought up through collaborative efforts, this is not the case. To me the presidential election seem to be more of a competitive effort, and even though some collaborative objects that are rather quite honest are presented, the debates seem like more of a way of judging candidates for selection, looking for ones that shine a bit brighter than the other lights in the room so to speak. In conclusion, the debates are a more competitive effort than a collaborative one, and even though they are a bit of a mixture of the two, they have more of a competitive feeling associated with