On Sept. 10, ABC News Network hosted the second presidential debate between Republican nominee Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris. Millions of Americans tuned into the debate to watch interactions between the two candidates and, most importantly, to hear the stances of one who will become the next president of the United States. Over the years, the guidelines for presidential debates have continuously evolved, ultimately impacting viewers’ perception of the results. The recent debate sparked many citizens’ opinions regarding debate rules. 

Past presidential debates have been more lenient toward specific debate rules than this year’s approach, which has involved stricter, more enforced rules. 

Bob Furmanek, a State High social studies teacher, thought the debate was “needed for the country” and “solidified people’s opinions based on what was offered and what people had previously thought.” Citizens, both locally and nationally, all had a different perspective on the debate, but the question remains if conclusions can be based on the rules candidates were expected to follow.

Candidates speaking at a debate can evoke strong emotions in many voters who are looking for new policies and information their preferred candidate might offer. In the debate room this year, no live audience was present. This was a widely debated topic, with different opinions on whether an audience could make or break a key event in the presidential campaign. 

“I am glad that there is no live audience, and I just feel like having one kind of makes it seem like a performance rather than a debate that should be very formal,” senior Raya Wolyniec, student government vice president, said. A proposed idea by many Americans is for citizens to voice their must-ask questions and concerns to be presented by the moderators. This idea could offer a good balance between the input of Americans within the debate and remaining formal without an audience. 

Facial expressions often speak louder than words in a political debate, mainly when a split screen is featured throughout the debate. The body language shown on TV impacts viewers’ votes during election season. A new perspective of a candidate can be seen based on their facial expressions and body language, including eye rolling, posture, and smirking. 

“I think that’s important for us to see. These are the people that are going to be making major decisions for us. You want to see if somebody is at ease or uptight. I think that is critical in those things,” Andrew Merrit, an AP Government teacher, said. Ultimately, expressions are needed from a split screen to allow an additional view of candidates. 

A presidential debate lasts only 90 minutes, and candidates and moderators are expected to highlight the crucial points of candidates’ policies and perspectives on different events—every second counts. The debate is fast-moving, so candidates are given a time limit while answering questions and forming rebuttals. 

“Part of the problem in our society is we want black-and-white answers to great questions…I wish they had more time to think and answer the questions,” Merritt said.  

Furmanek offered a different approach to the question. “Without that structure, I think you fall into disarray. But at the same time, the allowance of that and most moderators do give some wiggle room, but that too becomes subjective,” he said. 

Candidates are human and make mistakes, and collaboration is sometimes necessary for creating solid ideas, but some argue it’s not fair for candidates to be able to discuss with their team during the debate. 

Furmanek believes that collaborating with a team is necessary. “They’re on a global platform. Everything said will be kind of truly microscoped. So to stop, reflect, and bounce ideas off of someone else that basically helped them generate the whole thing… gets the most authentic answer,” he said. 

Respectfully, Merritt added an analogy. ”I think it is them for themselves. In the real world, it is kind of like a test, right? If you go to take an SAT halfway through the SAT, you are like, well, I am not really doing well in the math section, so I am going to go meet with my advisors on the math section? No, that is the test,” he said. 

Acquiring knowledge about the upcoming presidential election is an essential part of being a citizen. Wolyniec is a student who cannot vote in the upcoming election, but still believes it’s important to be informed. “It is an important thing to be aware of…what is happening in the election because it affects everybody’s lives. We might be kids, but it still affects us,” she said. 

“Every eligible US citizen has a duty to vote, and every future voter, a duty to learn. If one is educated on the state of national affairs now, they will be a better voter in the future,” Luca Snyder, student government president, said in an email. When it comes to debating, even the rules can be debated.