Student criticizes debate between College Republicans, Democrats

10/29/08 - To the Cigar, I was expecting a livelier, more robust performance in the recent "debate" between the University of Rhode Island College Republicans and the College Democrats-in addition to a significantly more professional setting.

After my attendance on Thursday night, I thought I would throw out my own two cents for the public to review.

The first thing that frustrated me was the intermission: there was no level of formality associated with the debate that demanded such a break (you could walk in and out of the room at your convenience.) Presumably we're all mature young men and women of 18 years or older, and after an hour of sitting don't need a bathroom break or a chance to stretch our legs-an opportunity which, ironically, no one took. The intermission allowed the debate to be deluded to resemble an amateur variety show.

It was not enjoyable, but one felt compelled to stay for politeness' sake: the rap's rhythm was scattered and broken, holding us in suspense after every line (as though the rapper was feeling a tad insecure, and baiting for an encouraging round of applause); and any non-existent rhyming there may have been was obscured by the rap's flowing like a river of bricks.

In retrospect, I can see that the rap's message was a defiant refusal to accept that bad things happen to good people, and expecting of some distant, narcissistic government deity to force me, the taxpayer, to pay for a "solution" to the rapper's problems; but for the whole performance I didn't even pick up on the fact that it was a rap.

I spent the next few hours thinking that it was a poor attempt at stand-up, especially after the audience gave him a token giggle when he mentioned getting intimate with his girlfriend.

I don't know about the rest of the students at URI, but I don't go to a debate to be entertained or to feel "good" about things (like having to watch people receive flowers). I'm happy that the girl under the "spotlight" Thursday night has a doting boyfriend, but it's completely unimportant to me during a span of time I expect to be watching an uninterrupted clash of ideologies.

It's hard to tell who won the contest when it came time for the vice presidential discussions. The College Democrats' had presence, confidence, and a tight rundown of Sen. Joseph Biden's accomplishments during his multiple terms.

Then again, when your candidate is a 35-year dinosaur in the Senate, it's really easy to harvest three or four "accomplishments" and proclaim them as a testament to his experience; and all that counts for naught when you're experienced in being consistently wrong.

It would have been nice if Gov. Sarah Palin's resume had been read a little bit better; its presentation Thursday night too greatly resembled a rundown of the "feathers" in Obama's cap, in the way of confidence and depth.

The difference is that while it is easy to lose sight of depth and substance while trying to explain why a candidate's qualifications include his former-community organizer status (an unelected, unaccountable, self-imposed position that has heretofore been his chief gold-star), and a vacant Senate record that is pockmarked with oddities like supporting infanticide, explaining Palin's executive experience should read like a heartwarming novel of success: from City Council (four years), to mayor (six years), to chairing the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, to beating the incumbent Republican governor in the '06 primary and besting the former two-term Democrat governor in the general election, to her 84 percent approval rating as governor in the state that gives the 2nd-highest power to that office.

It would have been nice, too, if no one had left out the Wall Street Journal's Sept. 10 comparison of her to former Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton as "an executive giant."

Maybe I'm nitpicking about this, but I think it could have been presented better. But the most important critique I have of Thursday's political festivities was that none of it mattered-it was just a "fun" formality. It could be justly argued that it was nothing more than a joint press-conference (minus the press) than a debate, since a completely benign, turn-based, 2-hour statement of both candidates' policies replaced the exciting ideology clash I'd been hoping for. Even if the College Republicans and the College Democrats had endeavored to challenge each other, I'll eat my beautiful Irish spogger if it counted for anything.

By now, I'd expect that undecided voters are few and far between on this college campus-you're either voting for McCain or Obama by this point; and the polarizing forces this campaign season are so strong that no minute-long statement by undergraduate political science majors is going to change your mind.



Frank LiVolsi