Candidates “hammer away,” profs follow up

To G. Thomas Goodnight, some of the most important issues in the upcoming presidential… To G. Thomas Goodnight, some of the most important issues in the upcoming presidential election are the ones the candidates did not discuss in last Friday’s debate.

Goodnight, a professor of communication at the University of Southern California, listed issues the panelists described as “an elephant in the room,” or important issues not discussed in the debate, such as Social Security and the number of Americans in jail.

“There are two million Americans in jail, including Martha Stewart, and they will eventually get out,” Goodnight said. “I have no idea why these issues aren’t being addressed.”

A “rapid-response panel” of four foreign policy experts met at Pitt’s Alumni Hall to watch and discuss the second presidential debate Friday. The town-hall format allowed viewers to see how candidates behaved with voters when answering questions in a live format

The Ridgway Center for International Security Studies hosted the panel.

“Character is what’s at stake; credibility is what’s at stake,” Goodnight said.

“Will the draft leak through? Will religion leak through?” he asked.

The draft was brought up during the debate, and both candidates came out strongly against it. President George W. Bush dismissed rumors from the Internet that a draft might be instituted.

“We’re not going to have a draft, period. The all-volunteer army works,” Bush said.

A. Gregory Thielmann, a former intelligence director at the U.S. State Department, was not convinced the candidates could maintain military obligations without a draft. He offered South Korea as an example of demands placed upon U.S. troops.

“South Korea wants the troops there. Where does that leave us with this desperate need for troops?” Thielmann said.

Religion became an issue in the position on abortion of Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. Though he brought attention to his religious upbringing, he said he refuses to legislate his views.

“But I can’t take an article of faith for me and legislate it for someone who doesn’t share that article of faith, whether they be agnostic, Jew, protestant, whatever. I can’t do that,” Kerry said.

Elena A. Baylis, an assistant professor of law at Pitt, was disappointed by the focus on the issues such as health care, tax cuts and medical liability reform.

“The candidates continue to hammer away at certain themes that are useful to them,” Baylis said.

Gordon R. Mitchell, associate professor of communication and director of debate at Pitt, was surprised at the extreme differences between the candidates regarding talks with North Korea.

“[Bush] is standing strongly against bilateral talks with North Korea, and Kerry is almost the exact opposite,” Mitchell said. “I would urge the American people to focus on that issue.”

Goodnight pointed out examples of how the second presidential debate was unique from the first presidential and the vice-presidential debates.

“Kerry has been painted as someone who is cold, cerebral and an equivocator, and I didn’t see that,” Goodnight said. He also credited Bush with a good comeback effort.

“We saw him more in command of his ideas in this debate than he was in the first,” Goodnight said.

Theilmann commented on a question that urged Bush to describe what the president views as his three biggest mistakes during his presidency.

“That question is like, ‘When did you stop beating your partner?’ There is no good way to answer that,” Thielmann said.