0:00

Support for the show comes from

0:02

Into The Mix and Ben & Jerry's podcast

0:04

about joy and justice, produced

0:06

with Vox Creative. Thousands

0:09

of Afghans were forced to flee their homes in fear for

0:11

their lives when the Taliban took control

0:13

of Afghanistan in 2021. The

0:16

UK government pledged to take in 20,000

0:18

of them as refugees, but in the first year only 22

0:21

Afghans have been approved for asylum in

0:23

the UK. So what happened? And

0:26

what does this mean for the tens of thousands of people

0:29

left behind?

0:30

Hear that story on the latest episode

0:32

of Into The Mix.

0:36

Support for the

0:38

show comes from Gold Peak Real Brew

0:40

Tea. There's a time of day, about

0:43

an hour before sunset, where

0:45

the rays feel warm and the

0:47

breeze feels cool. But

0:49

that hour of golden bliss is always

0:52

gone too soon. You

0:54

might rekindle that feeling with a bottle of Gold

0:56

Peak. Made with high quality tea

0:58

leaves, its smooth taste transports

1:01

you to golden hour. At any hour.

1:04

Gold Peak tea. It's got

1:07

to be

1:07

gold.

1:10

From

1:13

Cafe and the Vox Media Podcast

1:15

Network, this is Now and Then.

1:21

I'm Heather Cox Richardson. And I'm Joanne

1:23

Freeman. Today we're going to be talking

1:25

about a topic that very recently

1:27

was in the news and is going to be in the news

1:30

again and again, looking forward

1:32

to next year and the oncoming

1:35

presidential election. And that is the topic

1:37

of presidential debates.

1:40

On Wednesday, August 23rd, eight

1:43

candidates for the Republican nomination debated

1:45

in Milwaukee, Wisconsin in an event

1:48

that was sponsored by Fox News. And

1:50

the candidates were Florida Governor Ron

1:52

DeSantis, 38-year-old

1:54

pharmaceutical executive Vivek Ramaswamy,

1:57

former Vice President Mike Pence,

1:59

former... UN Ambassador and South Carolina

2:01

Governor Nikki Haley, former New Jersey

2:04

Governor Chris Christie, South Carolina

2:06

Senator Tim Scott, North Dakota

2:08

Governor Doug Burgum, and former Arkansas

2:10

Governor Asa Hutchinson.

2:13

And as we certainly all know from

2:15

one way or another now, that former

2:17

President Trump did not participate

2:20

in the debate. Before the debate,

2:22

he was up around 46 percentage

2:24

points in Republican primary voter

2:27

support from his nearest

2:29

challenger Ron DeSantis. And so

2:31

he declined to participate in the debate, and of

2:33

course had much to say about why he didn't need

2:36

to participate in that debate, and will be addressing

2:39

in this episode some of why people

2:41

do or don't or should or shouldn't

2:44

participate in these kinds of debates.

2:47

So this particular debate was a really interesting

2:49

one, because of course it was a primary debate, and

2:52

it was a debate in which the people

2:54

who were on stage are all running

2:56

so far behind Trump, who's the front runner,

2:59

that it seemed like without

3:02

Hamlet there, if you will. So

3:04

that brought up the point of

3:07

these people debating, and

3:09

the point of Trump not debating, and

3:11

what it says to the American

3:13

people that these other candidates

3:17

were theoretically supposed to be

3:19

arguing about whatever one argues

3:21

at a debate. Crucially, there was a moment

3:23

in the debate when the moderator Brent Baer

3:25

asked each debater to raise their hand if

3:27

they would support Trump if he were the Republican

3:29

nominee, and all of them except Hutchinson

3:32

raised their hands, although Christie

3:34

later clarified that he was in fact

3:37

lifting a finger to say that

3:39

he would not, but he wanted to explain why

3:41

he would not. There were a couple moments

3:43

during

3:44

that debate that just made you catch

3:46

your breath. Equally remarkable to me was the

3:48

fact that they were asked to raise their hand

3:50

if they

3:50

believe in climate change, and

3:53

they didn't. What really jumped out to me about

3:55

that particular debate is the degree to which it was

3:57

performative. That is, I don't feel

3:59

like we have to.

3:59

learned anything new there at all. What

4:02

we saw were a number of people who were trying

4:04

to appeal to Trump's base and

4:06

yet provide an alternative to Trump

4:09

should something happen to him. But

4:11

he really was the elephant in the room.

4:13

And that kind of begs the question of what

4:15

is the purpose of debates in

4:17

today's political scene.

4:20

And also I think harks back to

4:22

the way that Trump used debates in

4:26

what really was a very new way in 2016 and 2020 in

4:28

a way that to me is different not

4:34

only by the way he acted but also because

4:37

debates nod to the

4:39

idea that we voters get to have

4:41

a sense of what's going on in the heads of

4:43

the people we're electing to office. And

4:46

instead in 2016 and 2020

4:49

Trump used debates as a way

4:51

to dominate, as a way to demonstrate

4:53

the way that he would govern and as what

4:56

was really a rejection

4:58

of democracy rather than participation

5:01

in it.

5:01

Right. I mean, particularly in lurking

5:04

behind Hillary Clinton in that one

5:06

memorable debate, you could argue he was

5:09

using technology and media in

5:11

a different kind of a way. He was debating,

5:13

I suppose you could say, with his presence.

5:15

It's worth thinking about what

5:17

it means to participate or not participate.

5:20

And then if you participate,

5:22

what are you saying with your presence and what you're

5:24

doing? I mean, the simple fact that we started

5:26

out by talking about people raising their

5:28

hands, whether they do or don't believe

5:31

in something, is pretty striking. That

5:33

would be hard put to define that as debate.

5:36

That's categorization. I

5:38

do think, though, it's important to take a look

5:40

briefly at least of the way Trump

5:43

used that debate stage as a performance,

5:46

because you pointed to that incredible,

5:49

I can still see it in my head, that incredible debate

5:51

with Hillary Clinton, where he

5:53

was very deliberately using

5:56

his physical presence. He's a big man

5:58

using his physical

5:59

to intimidate her, and she remembered

6:02

what that was like in her book,

6:04

What Happened, in 2017, in

6:07

which she said, it was one of those moments

6:09

where you wish you could hit pause and ask

6:11

everyone watching,

6:13

well, what would you do? Would you stay

6:15

calm, keep smiling, and carry on as if

6:17

you weren't repeatedly invading your space?

6:20

Or do you turn, look him in the eye, and

6:22

say loudly and clearly, back up,

6:24

you creep, get away from me? And

6:26

of course, there's a visceral response to that

6:29

statement of hers, right? That some part of you, because

6:31

of the

6:32

power of that image and the ways in which it was so

6:35

stalking is what it looked like, is what it felt

6:38

like. That some, certainly for me, some part

6:40

of me was, you know, yearns in

6:42

that situation for the person being stalked to turn around

6:45

and say, back up, but

6:47

again, this is a public

6:49

performance

6:50

of sorts. And on his

6:52

part, what he was doing was certainly

6:54

novel, but that put her in

6:56

an interesting and novel situation, and

6:58

also the fact that she was a woman

7:01

tangled that further as to how she should or shouldn't

7:04

respond. The other thing that jumps out since

7:06

then is in 2020, in the 2020 debates,

7:08

in that debate where Trump

7:11

tried to dominate Joe Biden

7:14

and clearly was trying to get

7:16

him to stutter and to lose

7:18

his composure. That was another

7:20

really interesting moment where if you remember, that's

7:23

the one where he directly

7:25

addressed the Proud Boys, the far right hate

7:27

group. When asked to disavow them,

7:29

he told them to stand back and stand

7:32

by. And you know, the thing about

7:34

that, of course, is that they did in fact stand

7:36

back and stand by, and they turned

7:39

up when they were called to come

7:40

to Washington DC on

7:42

January 6th, and a number of them are now

7:44

serving quite long jail terms. So

7:47

there is some degree to which

7:49

the things that Trump would say

7:51

and then try and walk away from.

7:54

We know now you absolutely have

7:56

to accept that it's not just

7:57

a performance, it's a warning about what's coming.

8:00

Well, and in that case, that

8:02

was a direct address to

8:04

a public who heard it and

8:07

responded. So in a way,

8:09

we're going to be talking throughout this episode about performance

8:12

versus content and impact.

8:14

There's a case in which, you know, one could argue

8:18

more than anything else, he was displaying who

8:20

he wanted to appear to be as a leader.

8:22

But boy, he appealed to a certain public

8:25

effectively with that one comment, which

8:28

still stand back and stand by a sort

8:30

of zinger phrase that's now attached

8:32

to Trump.

8:33

So this whole idea of debating

8:36

and appealing to the public

8:38

and certain publics doesn't really start

8:40

until 1858. So why don't we jump

8:42

right into the

8:44

Lincoln-Douglas debates? No,

8:46

no, no, no, no. Now

8:51

that's actually normally the opposite of what

8:53

you do. You normally are like, let's

8:55

look back at early America and you just go, Joanne.

8:59

Well, actually, we're going to end up there because I was

9:01

actually really interested when we were prepping for this to

9:04

hear your take on early

9:07

appeals to the public, because

9:09

I guess I'd never really thought about how

9:13

lawmakers or hopeful lawmakers

9:15

did that in the early republic

9:18

and why it may or may not have been

9:20

scandalous. The fact of the matter

9:23

is, as much as public opinion mattered

9:25

in the new American republic, it

9:28

was a huge issue.

9:29

Just stop right there. Say that

9:32

again, because we take

9:34

it so for granted. But of course,

9:36

in a monarchy, popular opinion

9:39

only matters in sort of the general

9:42

Machiavellian sense, well,

9:44

you got to keep people happy enough that they don't come

9:46

cut off your head.

9:47

Correct. That was, from

9:50

the very beginning, something that

9:52

the

9:53

founding generation was very aware of

9:55

that in a monarchy, public opinion does not

9:57

matter in the same way that in the new American

9:59

nation, it was going to matter to an extreme

10:02

degree

10:03

that whatever happened, it was one reason why

10:05

Americans in this period thought that the press was

10:08

so important, because it would take

10:10

things to the public so that they could have

10:12

their opinion be informed and

10:14

shaped. But what this meant was that

10:16

throughout this sort of early period,

10:19

people were on the one hand saying, public opinion

10:22

matters here. It's why we're something different.

10:24

We're small R, Republican government.

10:27

We are a democratic republic that appeals to the

10:29

people. On the other hand, who is the public?

10:32

How does one appeal to them? And even should

10:34

we be directly appealing to them? It's

10:37

one thing to say public opinion matters.

10:39

It's another thing to say we should

10:42

be personally appealing to the public.

10:44

And that latter

10:46

instance, the idea that politicians

10:49

in some way or another should be appealing

10:51

to or speaking directly to the public was

10:54

not something that was really

10:56

accepted. Hamilton at one point

10:59

branded it in all capital letters, vanity.

11:02

It's appealing to the vanity of the people. The

11:04

people like to think that they're being

11:06

spoken to. But we

11:08

shouldn't be doing that. We should be spreading our message

11:10

around and the people should be judging

11:13

us based on our message and what we represent and not

11:15

based

11:16

on personal appeals to the public.

11:18

And you can see a handy example

11:21

of how shocking it appeared

11:23

for people, particularly high political

11:26

elite people, to address the public in

11:28

what took place during the presidential

11:30

election of 1800. There

11:33

you have the fact that in the presidential election

11:35

of 1800, which everyone recognized as a kind

11:37

of key moment when some fundamentals

11:39

about the nation might be decided,

11:42

as in what direction was the nation going to go,

11:44

something that was a little more small d,

11:46

democratic, or was it going to stick more? Every

11:49

time I say small r or small d, I

11:52

want to laugh because you and I spent a lot of time

11:53

saying that. That's because when we teach and

11:56

when we speak, people always hear it with the capital

11:58

letter.

11:59

going to move in a more Jeffersonian direction

12:02

and be more democratic, small

12:04

d, or was it going to stick with Federalists and be,

12:06

in that sense, a lot more aristocratic?

12:09

1800 people recognized was going to help

12:11

push the nation in one direction or another,

12:13

and New York was going to be

12:15

a really key state in

12:18

deciding the election. And so there you have

12:20

Aaron Burr, who actually is a vice presidential

12:22

candidate, and Alexander Hamilton, who's

12:25

a, if not the leading Federalist in

12:27

New York, decide that they themselves

12:30

actually are going to go from polling

12:32

place to polling place and

12:34

debate. And as people described

12:37

it at the time- At the polling places? At

12:39

the polling places, literally.

12:41

And does the election last for a single day?

12:44

No. In New York City, it was actually

12:46

three days. So it was over a three-day

12:48

period. The two men argued

12:50

what at the time were called the debatable

12:52

questions. Before large groups of people

12:55

at the polling places, one would stand up on

12:57

some platform of something, make

13:00

a platform of something and speak about

13:02

what he thought the pressing issues are, and then would

13:04

politely step down and the other person would step up. And

13:08

he would respond in turn, and

13:10

they went from polling place to polling place, having

13:12

these weirdly

13:14

not really planned, but far

13:16

more public and far more directly

13:19

engaged with the public than

13:21

what people had seen before. And

13:24

the press at the time was stunned

13:27

on both sides. So for example,

13:29

a Federalist newspaper seeing this,

13:31

the daily advertiser said, how

13:33

could a would-be vice president

13:36

stoop so low

13:38

as to visit every corner

13:41

in search of voters?

13:42

And a Republican newspaper,

13:45

the commercial advertiser, said that

13:47

there was a, quote, astonished electorate

13:50

greeting these kinds of efforts. Particularly

13:52

they were stunned at Hamilton, who was certainly not Mr.

13:54

Democracy, running around as well

13:57

debating and trying to engage people one

13:59

by one on the street.

13:59

The commercial advertiser

14:02

said, every day Hamilton is seen in

14:04

the street, hurrying this way and darting that. Here

14:07

he buttons a heavy-hearted Fed Federalist

14:10

and preaches up courage. There he meets a group

14:12

and he simpers in unanimity, again

14:14

to the heavy-headed and hearted he talks of perseverance

14:17

and, God bless the mark, of

14:19

virtue. So these two men for three

14:21

days are running around in the streets, debating

14:24

each other in a semi-formal way

14:26

at polling places and then just trying to engage

14:29

with the voters.

14:29

Supposedly at one point Hamilton

14:32

arrives at a polling place on a horse

14:35

and is actually pulled off of his

14:37

high horse. May or may not

14:39

have actually happened, but certainly there are people who describe

14:42

it having happened. So on the one hand, they're

14:44

engaging with the public to make a point. On

14:47

the other hand,

14:48

no one gets past the fact that these are elite

14:50

politicos who are gasp

14:53

among the public appealing to them directly.

14:56

That was really not the norm. I'm

14:58

sorry. I'm back here not only

15:01

on the fact that that is such a shocking

15:03

thing, but also that these two men who

15:05

are linked

15:06

in history for all time, because

15:09

one of them shot and killed the other, were

15:12

running around opening

15:14

up the concept of debating before the public.

15:17

I just had no idea. Maybe

15:19

not opening it up, but certainly practicing

15:21

it in a way that people

15:23

were stunned by. Well, this

15:26

has to do with the small world of politics too in this

15:28

time period. They practiced law cases together. They weren't

15:31

the same parties. You know, they

15:33

were elite politicians in

15:35

New York City, so it was a relatively small

15:37

world.

15:37

So in that sense, this

15:40

makes perfect sense, but you're right. The only thing

15:42

we really know about them in conjunction

15:44

with each other is the fact that one killed the other,

15:46

which is kind of on the other end of the spectrum

15:49

as far as they're getting along with each other or not. It's

15:51

just so funny to me to hear them described

15:54

as, you know, politicians going

15:56

about their daily lives, riding horses, talking to people, doing everything.

15:59

And in fact, since we

16:02

know how the story comes out, it's

16:04

bizarre. And one of the things that always surprises

16:06

me about history is that time isn't really even

16:08

fully one-dimensional, because you

16:10

can't go

16:11

backward and forward. You

16:14

can only go forward. So to be able to look backward

16:16

and say, dude, run, he's

16:18

going to kill you. I'm listening to you talk about

16:20

them doing this and going place to place. And I'm

16:22

thinking, Al, hit the road.

16:25

Oh, man. I can promise you, if

16:27

there's something that man was never called in his entire

16:30

life, it was Al.

16:34

But if I could go back, you know. So

16:37

if the idea of appealing to the public is

16:40

beginning to be popular in the early republic

16:42

after 1800, and I think that really is a

16:45

sign of the opening up of... But let me

16:47

phrase that a little way. It's beginning

16:49

to be

16:50

attempted, not to be

16:53

accepted. So many things, and it's

16:55

one of the things that fascinates me about this early

16:57

period,

16:58

they have a need to do something,

17:00

and they're not sure how to do it. And

17:02

they try something out, and they're

17:04

not sure how they feel about it, and they're not sure

17:07

how it's going to play. And looking back

17:09

from our point of view, we're like, well, of course they appealed

17:11

to the public.

17:13

Or, of course they needed a party mechanism

17:15

to spread pamphlets or whatever.

17:17

There are things that now we take for granted that political

17:20

parties and political organization can do that they

17:23

didn't have and that they didn't do. And what you see,

17:25

and New York is an example of that, is people

17:28

just addressing the moment and

17:30

responding to a need and a feel of urgency

17:33

and doing something. And it wasn't

17:35

that necessarily people said, that's a brilliant

17:37

idea. But it was a change,

17:40

and it was a movement

17:42

towards what increasingly people would understand

17:45

was necessary.

17:51

This

17:54

week on Intuit, a TV and

17:56

movie fall preview. From the

17:58

new Scorsese film,

17:59

of the Flower Moon, I was

18:02

sent down from Washington, D.C. to see about these

18:04

murders. to the Golden Bachelor. He's

18:07

Gary. And I'm your first Golden

18:09

Bachelor. We'll tell you what to watch.

18:12

Also, a few recommendations of

18:14

stuff you might have missed so far this year, like

18:17

Project Greenlight. It's not excellent,

18:19

but it is a fascinating portrait

18:22

of making movies and the problem with

18:24

making movies at this moment.

18:27

This week on Intuit, Vulture's

18:29

Pop

18:29

Culture Podcast.

18:57

For more Cafe History content, check out Time

18:59

Machine, a weekly column by our editorial

19:01

producer, David Kerlander,

19:03

inspired by

19:05

each now and then episode. You

19:08

can also watch the episode of the Vulture Show at

19:10

the end of the show where

19:12

we're going to be talking about the new and more exciting movies.

19:15

And we'll be right back. Thanks for watching. I'm David Kerlander.

19:18

I'm your host, David Kerlander. And

19:20

I'm your host, David Kerlander. And I'm your

19:22

host, David Kerlander.

19:24

And I'm your host, David Kerlander. And

19:26

I'm

19:27

your host, David Kerlander. And in the last, I

19:32

am here to help you learn about how yourClick

19:35

on this episode.

19:38

That

19:38

is actually the 2016, which

19:54

was titled the presidency and

19:56

the need to appeal to people the way

19:58

that presidents like Andrew Jackson do.

19:59

But that brings up

20:02

a new approach to debates in 1858

20:05

with Abraham Lincoln, who's a candidate

20:07

for the Senate in Illinois, and Stephen

20:09

Douglas, who is the sitting senator

20:11

in Illinois, who is

20:13

hoping to be re-elected.

20:16

And it's important to remember when we talk about the Lincoln-Douglas

20:19

debates of 1858, that in

20:21

fact in those days before the 20th century,

20:24

senators are elected by the state

20:26

legislature. So when

20:28

we talk about the Lincoln-Douglas debates and about

20:31

how they're about a Senate seat from Illinois, Lincoln

20:34

and Douglas are not actually running

20:36

to get votes for, literally

20:39

for themselves from the

20:41

people, but rather to get their candidates

20:44

of their party to dominate the legislature,

20:47

because if they can do that, then they will

20:49

in turn be elected. So in 1858,

20:51

Douglas is the Democratic candidate for

20:56

re-election in the Illinois Senate.

20:59

And he is the person

21:01

who's trying to articulate a vision of

21:03

democracy that says

21:05

that what really makes somebody a Democrat,

21:09

I'm sorry, small D Democrat in

21:11

the United States is that they believe in local

21:13

government.

21:14

So long as people at the state

21:16

level vote for a policy,

21:20

that policy should be the one

21:22

that's in place, even if the

21:24

Congress, which represents the whole

21:27

of the country, wants to do something

21:29

else. And of course, what this is really coming down to,

21:32

especially in the American South, is the issue of human

21:34

enslavement. And also, though,

21:36

it's worth pointing out that this also is tied

21:38

up in the issue of taking over land

21:41

from indigenous Americans in especially

21:43

the Southern states. So this idea

21:45

of popular sovereignty, the

21:47

idea that the people

21:49

get to decide, is

21:52

the idea that Stephen Douglas is

21:54

pushing in 1858 at a time

21:57

that really matters because in 1854,

21:59

Congress has gotten rid of

22:02

the prescription that you can't have enslavement

22:05

in the lands above the Missouri Compromise

22:07

Line, which runs to the south of Missouri.

22:11

And the Congress has said, no, no, no, no, Congress

22:13

is going to go ahead and let enslavement

22:16

be established in those parts

22:18

of the old Louisiana Purchase that

22:21

are above that line. And then in 1857, the

22:23

Supreme Court has

22:26

gone further with the Dred Scott decision and

22:28

said that in fact Congress has no power

22:30

to legislate the territories. The idea

22:33

is popular sovereignty, that people

22:35

get to vote on whether or not there's enslavement

22:37

in the territories that are eventually

22:40

going to become states. What that

22:42

means is that so long as an

22:44

enslaver brings even a single enslaved

22:47

human being into one of those territories

22:49

or states, because of the Constitution

22:51

which protects the right to property and human beings

22:54

are property in this period, that state

22:56

is going to have to become a slave state. And

22:58

what that will do is it will enable enslavers

23:00

to take over first the entire American West,

23:03

but then as well the West

23:05

and the South together will have enough votes to overall

23:09

the free states in the Union. So what they're

23:11

really arguing about with the issue of

23:13

popular sovereignty is whether

23:16

the majority of people in the United

23:18

States who have the control

23:20

of the House of Representatives in this period, whether

23:23

they are going to be able to maintain

23:26

states that do not honor enslavement

23:30

in the face of this expanding what

23:32

Lincoln is going to call slave power. Alright

23:34

so if that's the background, worth

23:36

pointing out that Stephen Douglas was a short

23:39

little guy, very famous as an orator,

23:42

very profane, wildly profane

23:44

I have to say. Lincoln is tall,

23:46

not known at the time as an orator, although he's

23:49

going to become known as an orator, with

23:51

a high squeaky voice. And

23:53

that's a little bit of a problem because his voice

23:55

isn't going to carry as far as Stephen

23:57

Douglas's is.

23:58

Most people don't You didn't

24:01

hear that show, and Newby goes, beep!

24:04

I heard a little squeak actually that time. He's

24:06

just doing his Lincoln impersonation. Maybe

24:09

Newby is Lincoln reincarnated. So

24:13

Lincoln is trying to steal

24:15

Stephen Douglas' thunder, and Douglas starts

24:17

to make these speeches around the state

24:20

in 1858, in which he is going to try

24:22

and get people elected to the legislature

24:24

to support him going forward. And

24:26

Lincoln starts to go along behind him

24:29

and give speeches

24:29

following Douglas, because Douglas

24:32

is a famous enough guy that all these people are

24:35

coming in to hear him speak, coming

24:37

in from their farms or wherever, where not much goes

24:39

on. There's a famous guy speaking, we're going to

24:41

show up and hear him.

24:42

So then Lincoln starts speaking afterward, and

24:45

Douglas starts to grumble about it. But

24:47

Lincoln's people go to the Douglas people

24:49

and say, you know what, we should really do.

24:51

Why don't we have them debate each other? Douglas

24:54

has no interest in debating Lincoln. Douglas

24:56

doesn't want to give Lincoln a platform, because

24:59

no one's going to show up to listen to Lincoln. They're

25:01

going to show up to listen to Douglas. It's worth

25:03

noting too, that part of what

25:05

Lincoln is doing here, at the very same time

25:07

that as you say, Heather, they're running

25:10

for Senate, and so they're trying to get people

25:12

to vote the right people into the state legislature.

25:15

So that will affect who gets into the Senate

25:18

seat. But Lincoln is also

25:20

promoting himself,

25:21

because he's an up and comer, he

25:24

belongs to a party that's an up

25:26

and comer. Part of why he really

25:28

wants this to happen, is it will

25:30

help him and his party, regardless

25:33

of what happens in the election.

25:35

So Douglas though recognizes

25:37

that if he doesn't agree to debate Lincoln,

25:40

he's going to look like he's chickening out, because Lincoln

25:42

is very much on the rise. So he agrees

25:45

to give these debates with Lincoln, and they

25:47

are of course, what put Lincoln on the map

25:50

as a candidate for the

25:52

Illinois Senate, but they're also what really

25:54

puts Lincoln on the map as a national political

25:57

character.

25:58

I just want to add one point, because. I'm

26:00

always interested in honor and reputation

26:02

in politics. Lincoln's supporting

26:04

newspapers explicitly said Douglas

26:07

would be a coward if he

26:10

refused to take part. So it

26:12

wasn't even that he was afraid of being

26:14

seen as cowardly. The Lincoln people said,

26:16

all right, okay, you don't wanna take part, go ahead. But boy,

26:18

you're gonna really seem like a stinking coward.

26:21

And again, that in and of itself would have

26:23

had some play.

26:24

That was something that both Lincoln and his

26:26

people and Douglas and his people would have realized.

26:29

The power of, and that's what ultimately helps

26:32

lead to what we now know as the Lincoln-Douglas

26:35

debates is that for Douglas,

26:37

he didn't wanna take part, but he felt that he had to. For Lincoln,

26:40

boy, it was gonna be helpful in any number of ways,

26:42

no matter who won that election. And

26:44

so you do get ultimately a series

26:47

of debates. It's worth saying

26:49

this time period is really the age of

26:52

oratory.

26:53

So these debates, in a way

26:55

that is totally foreign now, these

26:57

debates took roughly three hours

26:59

in which one would say something and then the

27:02

other one would say something. And there

27:04

might be, again, a response back and forth, but people

27:06

would stand in an audience. And there

27:08

were a massive numbers of people at

27:11

these debates and would listen

27:13

for three hours to the points going

27:15

back and forth. It's a real debate,

27:17

as opposed to what we're gonna talk about soon, which

27:19

are less than real debates. And

27:22

it had an audience that was listening.

27:24

Some of

27:26

average Americans listening, and of course,

27:28

reporters. Well, and what's interesting too

27:30

about that is that the audience is yelling,

27:33

they're heckling, they're laughing, they're cheering.

27:36

It is also a real

27:39

demonstration on Lincoln's

27:41

part

27:41

of

27:43

a belief in, sorry,

27:45

small D democracy, that he's willing

27:47

to go into what our hostile

27:50

audiences, because they are for the most

27:52

part hostile. Of course, the Democrats

27:54

are gonna win this election

27:56

and talk essentially, although the audiences

27:59

are full of.

27:59

everybody who's in the area, the women, anybody

28:02

who's around because this is exciting, but

28:05

the only voters are white men. And

28:07

to go to those voters and

28:09

to say to them, you

28:12

must not support

28:14

the idea of popular sovereignty,

28:16

which will give you everything that Douglas is

28:18

trying to argue in the case of

28:21

racial superiority, because

28:23

it is against the Declaration of Independence.

28:26

I've thrown three books across the room in my life, and

28:28

one of them is the Lincoln-Douglas

28:29

Debates, because Douglas

28:32

is viciously racist. He just hits

28:34

on race again and again and again with

28:37

every word and every epithet you can think,

28:39

and gets the crowd whipped up behind

28:41

him about

28:43

all the racist possible things

28:45

he can say,

28:46

especially in the southern part of the state, which is very

28:48

heavily influenced by the South. Lincoln

28:51

backs off on defending racial

28:53

equality, but he always

28:56

says, wait a minute here,

28:58

this country was formed on the idea

29:01

that all people are created equal, all

29:03

men are created equal. And if

29:06

we're gonna tear that out

29:07

of our history, let's do

29:10

it. Which one of you is willing to do that?

29:12

And he hammers on that again and

29:15

again and again and again, and he keeps

29:17

hitting at the concept of popular

29:19

sovereignty, and the fact that the Dred

29:21

Scott decision by the Supreme Court says

29:23

that in fact, Congress has no power to legislate

29:26

in the territories. So he keeps

29:28

saying to Douglas, how can you keep

29:30

saying that you're defending popular sovereignty

29:33

when the Supreme Court has just said that you actually

29:35

can't keep enslavement out of the territories? And

29:37

finally, Douglas gets

29:40

so

29:41

angry, I think is the right word, in Freeport,

29:43

Illinois, he comes up with what

29:45

becomes known as the Freeport Doctrine, in which he

29:47

says, well, local people can

29:49

just refuse to put together slave

29:52

patrols, and all the local legislation

29:54

that otherwise would support

29:57

the keeping of slaves in these

29:59

territories.

29:59

And with that, the fat is in the fire

30:02

because Lincoln is like, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, you're saying

30:04

we should ignore a Supreme Court decision?

30:06

At the same time that enslavers say, hey, wait

30:08

a minute, they really could do that. So we need a slave

30:11

code in the territories. What

30:13

happens in that debate becomes

30:16

the defining line that goes into

30:18

the election of 1860, when

30:21

in fact, the extreme

30:23

Southern enslavers

30:24

go forward with a platform that calls

30:27

for the federal government to protect enslavement

30:29

in the territories. Douglas

30:31

tries to protect popular sovereignty, and

30:34

Lincoln looks at the whole thing and says, see, I

30:36

told you they're gonna make slavery national.

30:38

That debate,

30:40

which again, three hours every day,

30:42

they're hammering each other, that

30:44

debate in a way is, first of all,

30:46

Lincoln's belief,

30:49

I think, that even

30:51

farmers from the countryside can

30:53

figure out reality if it's put

30:55

in front of them in very clear terms,

30:58

and pushing somebody until they make

31:00

those terms really clear, that

31:03

debate becomes almost a model for

31:06

what a political debate should be. And

31:09

I wanna add to that, because there's another

31:11

way in which it,

31:13

if not models, certainly demonstrates

31:16

the realization, and again, the reach

31:19

for reach, the fact that these debates,

31:22

people understand that they matter. The

31:24

two men, Lincoln and Douglas, understand

31:27

that they're gonna reach far beyond the

31:29

admittedly massive audiences,

31:32

tens of thousands of people sometimes listening to

31:34

these debates. They're going to have reach, and they're

31:36

going to have an impact. And so press

31:38

coverage of them

31:40

really matters. And Lincoln

31:42

in particular is very attuned

31:45

to press coverage of what he's saying.

31:48

And again, in Freeport here, there's a report

31:51

in the Chicago Times on August 29th, 1858 of

31:53

what happened at

31:56

the beginning of Lincoln's comments,

31:58

which shows you the realization.

31:59

of the vital importance of capturing

32:02

these and spreading these debates

32:04

around. Supposedly, Lincoln began

32:06

by saying, fellow citizens, ladies

32:09

and gentlemen, and then the presiding officer

32:12

over the debate, Deacon Ross, said, hold

32:15

on, Lincoln,

32:16

you can't speak yet. Hit ain't

32:18

here, and there is no use of your speaking unless

32:20

the Chicago Press and Tribune has a report.

32:23

And Lincoln responded,

32:24

ain't hit here? Where is he? Now,

32:27

apparently, Hit, who's Robert, who

32:30

was a reporter, was there, but was in the back

32:32

of a massive crowd and couldn't

32:34

find a way up front. And so allegedly, he was

32:36

passed over the heads of people so that he could

32:39

make it up to the platform so

32:41

that he could actually hear and report

32:44

the debate. Now, the Chicago

32:46

Press and Tribune and the Chicago Times,

32:49

for the purposes of these debates, hired

32:52

stenographers, and stenography was relatively

32:54

new at the time, trained in shorthand

32:57

to take down every word as

33:00

uttered,

33:00

they then raced to the trains

33:02

to, first of all, get the

33:04

shorthand translated back into actual

33:07

English on the train rides, but to get them to newspaper

33:09

offices, to get them into print, and

33:12

then the new National Wire Service, the Associated

33:14

Press, would spread this around

33:17

so that, again, it feels primitive

33:19

by our standards, but the fact

33:21

that they're going through all of this to

33:24

capture these debates as they're taking

33:26

place, to use stenography to really capture

33:29

them in a realistic way and to spread them around,

33:31

ultimately, nationally, because the Associated

33:34

Press, that's really striking.

33:36

And again, they're

33:37

fighting for Senate seats and they're

33:39

thinking on a very specific level of the state

33:41

legislature, but they're very aware

33:44

of the fact, particularly Lincoln, that

33:46

this is going to have a broader audience, and it's

33:48

why Lincoln pays so much attention

33:51

after the debates to collecting

33:53

them, to putting them in a scrapbook,

33:55

to getting them published, to focusing

33:58

on their accuracy.

33:59

1860 because he

34:02

knows the power of these debates

34:04

and he wants to deploy it in the next

34:06

election down the road.

34:08

I'm also interested in that in your anecdote

34:10

because I'm pretty sure the Chicago

34:12

Times was a Democratic newspaper and

34:14

hit represented the Chicago

34:16

Tribune, which is the Republican paper. And

34:18

Lincoln was determined to make sure the Republican was

34:20

up there to hear it as well because

34:22

the Democrats and the Republicans

34:25

reported those debates somewhat differently.

34:28

And you wanted to make sure you had your version out

34:30

there. But if that is

34:32

the use of a debate to

34:34

articulate a new ideology

34:37

and to contrast it really powerfully

34:39

with Douglass's, if

34:41

he had stopped with a Lincoln-Douglas debates, it

34:44

would have been enough. I mean, we would still study the

34:46

Lincoln-Douglas debates. And in fact, the fact that he

34:48

went

34:48

on to do other things means we don't study them perhaps

34:50

as much as we ought to have. But the link

34:52

between racism and that states rights

34:55

ideology and that concept of local

34:57

government states and state government is

34:59

all there.

35:00

And public appeal

35:03

and getting people's emotions gunned up

35:05

with those very issues. Again, just

35:08

as you're describing the crowd, that popular

35:10

or populist component of

35:12

getting the public all riled up based

35:14

on these things, also

35:16

they're in person happening demonstrably

35:19

during these debates. Which is one of the reasons I

35:21

have faith in the American public, to be honest, is because

35:23

despite all that, they still elected Lincoln

35:26

president.

35:26

The fact that he was willing to do

35:29

that and say, listen, here are my principles. And

35:32

he lost in the short term, but we all

35:34

won in the long term.

35:36

So if the Lincoln-Douglas

35:38

debates show the possibilities

35:41

of principle and appeal

35:43

to a voting population

35:45

and how technology can spread that, the

35:48

other famous debate that always comes to mind

35:50

when we think about American political debates

35:52

is of course, the 1960 contest between

35:55

Democratic presidential nominee, John

35:58

F. Kennedy and

35:59

Republican nominee Richard

36:02

Nixon. And of course, in

36:04

the same way that we were just talking about

36:07

some technological advances that gave

36:09

the Lincoln-Douglas debates a

36:11

different kind of impact, we're now going to be looking at

36:13

a different form of technology that gives

36:16

these debates a different kind of impact, and

36:18

that's television.

36:19

The 1960 debates were

36:21

really, in a sense, brought on

36:24

by the explosion of

36:26

television. In 1950,

36:28

some 11% of the population had a TV

36:31

in their home. Ten years later,

36:33

in 1960, around 88% of the population had a TV.

36:36

So

36:39

this is truly a technological explosion.

36:42

And politicians quickly

36:44

use this to their advantage. And of

36:46

course, the big person in this would be

36:48

Eisenhower in 52. And I love

36:50

this because you can go on YouTube and

36:54

look at the televised 1952

36:56

Republican Presidential

36:58

Convention.

36:59

And it's so boring,

37:01

meaning no offense if anybody here was at it. They

37:04

put TV cameras where

37:06

these guys are meeting in their white

37:08

shirts and black pants, and that's it. It's

37:10

just a bunch of guys milling around,

37:13

occasionally making a speech. There is a very... The

37:15

reason I watch it is there's a very famous moment where

37:17

they try and make Robert Taft

37:20

and Eisenhower kiss and make up, and

37:22

they're both sort of sitting on opposite ends of a

37:24

couch glaring at each other. But

37:27

quickly, Eisenhower's handlers,

37:29

after he gets the nomination, recognize how

37:31

popular he is having just won World

37:33

War II.

37:34

And they have him do what is

37:37

essentially a triumphant parade across

37:39

the country where people throw ticker tape,

37:41

and it becomes this TV

37:44

moment. So of course, after

37:46

Eisenhower is elected in 52 and

37:49

then reelected in 56, it only

37:51

makes sense that you're going to manufacture

37:54

something similar, but of course JFK

37:57

and Nixon don't have the kind

37:59

of popular...

37:59

that an Eisenhower does, so what are you gonna

38:02

do? You're gonna have him debate

38:05

on a television stage. So

38:07

on September 26, 1960, Kennedy, who

38:11

at this point is a Massachusetts senator, and Nixon,

38:14

who's president Eisenhower's vice president, take

38:17

part in the first of four

38:19

televised debates. And apparently

38:22

almost 70 million Americans tuned in

38:24

for the first debate, which was hosted by CBS

38:27

moderator, Howard K. Smith.

38:29

And this is notorious, but we'll

38:32

say it anyway. Nixon did not look

38:34

his best at this debate. This

38:37

is another Freeman diplomatic way

38:39

of saying he looked really bad. He

38:41

refused really extensive makeup.

38:44

He seemed pale. He seemed

38:46

unshaven. Supposedly

38:48

there was

38:49

even, you could see a gleam of sweat

38:51

on his upper lip and on his chin.

38:54

He blamed his appearance on a

38:56

recent hospitalization for a staph

38:58

infection that followed from

39:00

cutting his knee on a car door. If that was the

39:03

fact and he knew that,

39:04

those were not wise decisions on his part to

39:06

not get made up and to not really

39:09

attend to his appearance more. But again, we're in

39:11

a learning process when it comes to television. Kennedy,

39:14

on the other hand, of course, was characteristically

39:17

tanned. His hair was carefully done.

39:19

He was made up by his team just

39:21

before going on to begin the debates.

39:24

The debate itself was actually really

39:27

quite interesting in that

39:29

it was a careful debate. I mean, it's funny now,

39:32

because you think about what Nixon becomes in 68, but

39:34

both he and Kennedy were

39:37

answering specific questions about

39:39

their experience, about their

39:41

policies. And when I say about their experience,

39:44

I mean, literally they are saying, well, I

39:46

sit on this committee in Congress

39:48

and this committee is responsible for this.

39:51

And this is what I do on that committee. And

39:53

here's what I know about. And therefore,

39:54

here's what I mean, it's really specific

39:58

policy oriented. It's

40:00

a job interview. Comes

40:02

across as a job interview. But it's content-heavy.

40:04

They are actually stating

40:06

views and policies as opposed

40:09

to tap dancing and trying

40:12

to get attention.

40:13

And the people who heard it on the radio believed

40:15

that Nixon won. The people

40:17

who watched it on TV thought that JFK

40:20

had won. Nixon later said in

40:22

his 1979 memoir, it is

40:25

a devastating commentary on the nature of television as a

40:27

political medium

40:29

that would hurt me the most when the first debate was

40:31

not the substance of the encounter between

40:33

Kennedy and me, but the disadvantageous

40:36

contrast and our physical appearances. And this

40:38

is the line that I love. After the program

40:40

ended, callers, including

40:43

my mother, wanted

40:45

to know if anything was wrong because

40:48

I did not

40:48

look well. Nixon's running

40:50

mate, JFK's fellow Massachusetts

40:53

Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, supposedly

40:55

cried out when he was watching the debate in

40:57

Texas. That son of a bitch

41:00

just lost us the election.

41:01

Nixon went on then to try

41:04

and make up lost ground, try to get back in shape, and

41:07

to try and look good for the rest of the debates. But

41:09

of course, nobody really remembers

41:11

the rest of those debates. But wait a minute.

41:14

You can't skip with that, what his special

41:16

diet was. Go ahead. A four-a-day regimen of

41:18

milkshakes so

41:23

that he could gain weight and look better. I want that diet.

41:27

I want four milkshakes a day. Yeah, sounds pretty good, doesn't it? It's

41:29

worth going into politics, if you can drink

41:31

four milkshakes a day. Exactly.

41:33

Nonetheless, people did attribute Nixon's performance

41:36

in that first debate as being central

41:38

to him losing to Kennedy by a very

41:41

narrow margin in 1960. And

41:43

Kennedy himself said it was TV

41:46

more than anything that turned the tide. Now,

41:49

because of that, Nixon was adamant that

41:51

he would never again do another television

41:53

debate. And that introduces a change

41:55

in the way that debates are going to be used

41:58

going forward.

41:59

really dramatically in 1968 when

42:03

his handlers wanted him to go on TV

42:05

Nixon wanted absolutely

42:07

No part of it and in reaction

42:09

to that his handlers really emphasized

42:12

how important it was for him to Override

42:14

that previous impression of himself on TV

42:17

and to use television in new ways So

42:20

one of his media advisors told him

42:23

voters are basically lazy

42:25

Reason requires a high degree

42:27

of discipline of concentration Impression

42:30

is easier the emotions

42:32

are more easily roused closer

42:35

to the surface

42:36

more malleable

42:38

and so Nixon's campaign hires

42:40

a television producer a young man at the time

42:42

named Roger Ailes if That

42:45

name rings any bells interesting

42:47

Yeah He's gonna go on

42:49

to be one of the early people on the ground

42:51

floor at the Fox News Channel

42:53

to stage town hall As they

42:55

were called and they were town halls in which the

42:57

candidate answered questions from regular

43:00

people But they were all hand-picked

43:03

the press was not allowed Ailes

43:05

arranged the questions the sets

43:07

the camera angles the makeup

43:09

the crowds everything to

43:12

present Nixon as a Celebrity

43:15

as a figure as opposed

43:17

to somebody looking for a job interview

43:19

What you're describing there is a performance

43:22

like a real performance he appears as

43:24

a celebrity He's appealing

43:27

to emotion. That's a very different

43:29

kind of performance Yes And it's

43:31

a performance that is going to change the way

43:33

that we think about debates going forward

43:36

because Nixon Doesn't debate

43:37

he does it this way with Roger Ailes

43:40

So after that in 68 in 72

43:43

when the Democratic primary contenders

43:46

have a debate before the 1972 New

43:48

Hampshire presidential primary One

43:51

of the people there was a long shot

43:53

a 32 year old man named Ned call

43:55

Was technically too young to be elected, but he

43:58

was allowed to participate nonetheless

43:59

and he brought with him

44:02

a rubber rat to

44:04

symbolize urban decay, which

44:07

again, if you think about even 12

44:10

years earlier, the idea of

44:12

showing up in 1960 is

44:15

part of that presidential debate

44:18

with a prop of a

44:20

rubber rat. I mean, it's unthinkable.

44:23

The lexicon of

44:26

small D democratic debate

44:29

is evolving.

44:30

It's fascinating. That's what we're talking about

44:32

here, is the lexicon, the vocabulary,

44:35

the visual vocabulary and

44:37

the nature of these performances. Like

44:40

just in the small narrative that

44:42

we're outlining here, you can see

44:44

step-by-step people realizing what

44:47

the different mediums can do

44:48

and then trying desperately to take advantage

44:51

of them in a new and more powerful

44:53

way with each contest. And

44:56

so then of course, Nixon refuses

44:58

to debate George McGovern, the Democratic candidate from

45:00

South Dakota because he says,

45:02

much as Douglas would have said about Lincoln,

45:05

that it would give McGovern free airtime and

45:07

it would make him look like a much stronger candidate

45:10

than he actually was. So

45:12

we don't get another presidential debate

45:15

until 1976. Two

45:17

years after Nixon

45:18

leaves office, televised presidential

45:21

debates

45:22

return. In 1976, the

45:24

League of Women Voters sponsors three presidential

45:27

debates between candidate Jimmy

45:29

Carter and incumbent Gerald Ford.

45:32

And just as in 1960, there's a gap that

45:35

ends up defining the proceedings. At

45:37

one point, Ford rather incoherently

45:40

suggests that the Soviets did not

45:42

dominate Eastern Europe, citing

45:44

his own Helsinki Accords with the USSR

45:47

as evidence. He said on October

45:49

6th, 1976.

45:51

Now what has been accomplished

45:53

by the Helsinki Agreement? Number

45:56

one, we have an agreement where

45:58

they notify us and we notify... them

46:01

of any military maneuvers

46:03

that are to be undertaken. They have

46:05

done it in both cases where they've done

46:07

so. There is no Soviet

46:10

domination of Eastern Europe

46:13

and there never will be under a Ford

46:15

administration. Many believe that

46:17

that foreign policy gaffe ultimately cost

46:20

Ford the election.

46:22

That's always an interesting moment because I

46:24

sort of feel like he was told to get that on the

46:26

table to find some way to talk about the Helsinki

46:29

Accords and he thought that was a good opening. But

46:32

only four years later we're gonna have Ronald

46:34

Reagan using debates against Jimmy Carter

46:37

to

46:38

foreshadow, if you will, what's gonna happen

46:40

later with Trump in that they are performances

46:42

that are based not in reality but

46:45

rather in this idea

46:47

that whenever a Democrat, in this case Jimmy Carter,

46:50

is advancing a policy issue,

46:52

you know Reagan

46:54

responds with that sigh

46:56

and that sort of genial. There

46:59

you go again.

47:02

When in fact Carter was right,

47:04

his numbers were all right and Reagan's

47:07

numbers were based in his

47:09

ideological position. The actor prevails.

47:12

The actor prevailed. In that the actor

47:15

prevailed and what do people remember about the 1980 debates?

47:17

They remember, oh there

47:19

you go again. Yeah

47:21

and that change

47:23

in what the debates are supposed to be taken

47:25

really out of 1968 and then going into 1980

47:28

and finally washing up on the shores

47:30

of 2016 and 2020 is

47:32

a really different thing than Lincoln

47:34

and Douglas were doing and then even

47:37

I did this just so I

47:39

could put it in here, Erin and Al.

47:41

You had to get one last,

47:44

Erin. I did. Now there

47:46

is one more point here that gets to be

47:48

added in because it shows how

47:50

there still is, even in this

47:52

period that we're talking about this assumption about

47:55

the fundamental democratic importance of these

47:58

presidential debates and the simple

47:59

fact of, that I'm talking about here, is

48:02

the simple fact of the formation of the

48:04

Commission on Presidential Debates, which

48:06

takes place in 1987 under the joint sponsorship

48:09

of both the Republican

48:11

and Democratic parties. And

48:14

the idea behind the commission

48:16

was to ensure that the voting public

48:18

would have a chance to see

48:20

the leading candidates debate,

48:23

and again, we can put debate in quotation

48:25

marks now, depending on what we're talking about, but the idea

48:28

at least was to see the leading candidates

48:29

debate during the general election

48:33

campaign. Now interestingly,

48:35

Newton Minow, who had a lot to do with

48:38

the push to have this happen, he

48:40

was the chairman of the U.S. Federal Communications

48:42

Commission, and one of the reasons why he thought

48:45

these debates would be important, and

48:47

I find this fascinating, is because if

48:49

they were on television, they would be a shared

48:52

experience

48:54

by the American people. That the American

48:56

people together

48:57

would be able to witness this and experience

49:00

it and think about it and discuss it. So

49:02

he very much,

49:04

to him in his mind, was promoting

49:07

just by creating a sort of small

49:09

d, Democratic, we can all share this

49:11

moment, that that would matter, and that

49:13

there was no way to do that in his mind,

49:16

other than by doing this on TV.

49:18

Which is a good theory, actually,

49:20

I think. I

49:22

do think it takes us back to your earlier

49:25

point about

49:27

whether or not political debates are

49:29

in fact any longer appealing to

49:31

the public, with the idea

49:33

of achieving a clear

49:36

understanding of the political issues. Because

49:38

in fact, you could argue, and I think I might

49:41

argue, that political debate

49:43

as it is currently being enacted, at least

49:46

on the Republican stage we saw

49:48

in late August, a way of manipulating

49:51

a public, rather than of informing

49:53

a public. And that seems

49:55

to me to be a really important

49:57

distinction, and how we get around

49:59

that. is

50:01

harder to figure out, especially

50:03

in the sense that so many candidates now,

50:06

and especially former President Trump, go

50:08

around any kind of moderation, go

50:10

around any kind of anyone saying, this

50:13

is the reality, let's deal with this, and

50:15

instead go onto social

50:17

media and simply announce things that

50:19

aren't true. Are we still

50:21

using debates to advance the cause of

50:23

democracy or to break it? So here's

50:25

what I think. On the one hand, I agree with what you just said,

50:28

that in a sense, these debates have

50:31

become more manipulation than actual

50:34

debate of any kind. And they're

50:36

often emotional appeals, and there's

50:38

a lot of display and show, and

50:40

even demagoguery tossed

50:43

in. I think all of that is true. But

50:45

I also think the simple fact that they're still

50:48

happening

50:49

is a sign of a gesture

50:52

towards the realization that we,

50:54

the public, matter, that

50:56

our votes matter

50:58

and that our voices matter, so that, yes,

51:00

they are manipulative, definitely not

51:02

what they should or could be. But

51:04

the fact that they're happening should

51:07

be a reminder. They're

51:09

happening because of us. They're

51:11

happening because of the audience. And

51:14

that should be a reminder

51:17

to us, the American people. Our

51:19

votes matter and our voices matter.

51:22

That's who's being appealed to. That's

51:25

the ultimately point. However manipulative

51:27

and fake and showy they are,

51:30

they're happening because of us. And

51:32

particularly at this moment in time,

51:34

when there are so many fundamentals about

51:37

democracy that are seemingly up for debate

51:39

in the worst possible way, it's

51:42

so vitally important

51:44

to remember that part of the

51:46

equation. These things are happening,

51:48

these televised debates are happening, because

51:51

of us, because our voices and

51:53

our votes matter. And that should be in the mind

51:56

of every

51:57

person who is watching those debates,

52:00

about those debates, who is discussing those

52:02

debates. Ultimately, this is

52:04

about us.

52:10

Our conversation continues for members

52:12

of Cafe Insider. Heather and I

52:14

take you behind the scenes of each episode

52:17

in a special segment of Now and Then that we call

52:20

Backstage. So join

52:22

us backstage and get an inside

52:24

look at the thoughts we're wrestling with as we prep

52:26

for our weekly conversations. Head

52:29

to cafe.com slash history

52:31

to join. That's cafe.com

52:34

slash history.

52:38

That's it for this episode of Now and Then. If

52:41

you like what we do, please rate

52:43

and review the show on Apple Podcasts

52:46

or wherever you get your podcasts. It

52:48

makes a big difference in helping people find

52:51

the show. Your hosts are Joanne

52:53

Freeman and Heather Cox Richardson. The

52:56

executive producer is Tamara Sepper. The

52:58

editorial producer is David Kurlander.

53:02

The audio producer is Matthew Billy. The

53:04

Now and Then theme music was composed by Nat

53:06

Weiner. The cafe team

53:08

is Adam Waller, David Tadashior,

53:11

Noah Azalai, and Jake Kaplan.

53:14

Now and Then is presented by Cafe and

53:17

the Vox Media Podcast Network.