Implicit standards of public argument in presidential debates: what the 2016 debates reveal about public deliberation

ABSTRACT

The functioning of presidential debates commonly has been evaluated based on a consideration of polling and other studies testing their influence on campaigns and how well they have educated the public. What has not been recognized is that in some cases where there is agreement about the content and results of the debate, it is possible to draw inferences about public deliberation. This essay uses a close analysis of the 2016 general-election presidential debates in order to illuminate public deliberation in the 2016 campaign.

KEYWORDS:

• Presidential debate
• public deliberation
• Hillary Clinton
• Donald Trump

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Robert C. Rowland

Robert C. Rowland is a professor of communication studies at the University of Kansas, USA. His research focuses on rhetoric and political argument.