2008美国总统大选候选人辩论

2008美国总统大选候选人辩论

Debates among candidates are rare in most countries. But they have become a staple1 of American politics, particularly during the last 25 years. Americans like debates because the candidates can be compared in an unscripted, live performance. The candidates don't know what questions will be asked, nor what their opponent might say. History indicates that a bad performance, particularly a telling gaffe2, can badly damage a candidate in the polls. The debates are a “ key test” of the strength and abilities of the candidates, says CNN analyst Jeff Greenfield. A candidate cannot package himself in debates the way he can in party advertisements but must be quick on his feet3 to respond to unanticipated4 questions and criticisms, he adds.

The potential of debates to damage a vulnerable presidential hopeful is one reason why some candidates, particularly frontrunners10, are reluctant to risk their chances in such an uncontrolled environment--and the fewer debate rules there are, the less control the candidates have. But broadcast presidential debates, both in the primaries and in the general election, are now routine and expected by the American people.

Since 1987, the presidential debates have been organized by the bipartisan17 organization, the Commission on Presidential Debates. Its purpose is to sponsor and produce debates for the presidential and vice presidential candidates of the two major parties. In Election 2000, the commission set a threshold18 for the participation of third party candidates in the debates. They must show they have the support--as evidenced in a number of opinion polls--of at least 15 percent of the population.

Whatever the quality of the debates in Election 2000, they are unlikely to equal the most famous political debates in American history which occurred long before the invention of radio and television. In 1858, Stephen Douglas debated Abraham Lincoln for a U.S. Senate seat. The debates were held at seven sites throughout Illinois, one for each of the seven congressional districts. Douglas, a pro-slavery Democrat, was the incumbent19.Lincoln was anti-slavery. “ Honest Abe,” as he was endearingly called, lost the Senate race, but two years later was elected the first Republican president of the United States. The Lincoln Douglas debates are still heralded20 for the quality of the discourse at a crucial time in the nation's history.

全文翻译

候选人之间的辩论在大多数国家都很稀奇，但它们在美国政治生活中已司空见惯，特别是在过去的25年里。美国人喜欢辩论，因为他们可以根据候选人现场的即席发言，对他们进行比较。候选人

不知道人们将会向他们提出什么问题，也不知道对手将会怎样回答。历史表明，如果候选人表现不佳，特别是失言之举，会使他们在大选中严重受损。CNN的分析家杰夫·格林菲尔德说，辩论是对候选人的实力和能力的“严峻考验”。他还补充说，在辩论中，候选人不能够像在制作本党竞选广告那样包装自己，而必须迅速对事先毫无准备的问题和批评做出回答。

辩论有可能对一个脆弱的总统候选人造成伤害，这就是一些总统候选人，特别是那些在竞选中领先的人，不愿意在这些无法控制的环境中冒险的原因之一——辩论的规则越少，候选人就越无法控制。但是，不管是在初选，还是在大选中，总统电视辩论现在都已经成为惯例，且为美国人民所期待。

自1987年以来，总统辩论由共和、民主两党组成的“总统辩论委员会”组织实施。它的作用是，发起并实施两大党总统和副总统候选人辩论。在2000年竞选中，该委员会规定了第三党候选人参加辩论的条件：他们必须在多次民意测验中证明，至少拥有15%的选民支持率。

不管2000年的竞选辩论质量如何，它们都不大可能与美国历史上最著名的政治辩论相比，那时世界上还没有发明收音机和电视。1858年，斯蒂芬·道格拉斯与亚伯拉罕·林肯为竞选美国参议员席位，展开辩论。辩论在伊利诺伊州的七个国会选区举行，每区举行一场。在职民主党参议员道格拉斯亲奴隶制，而林肯则持反奴隶制立场。被亲昵地称之为“诚实的埃布”的林肯在参议院选举中失败，但两年之后，却当选为美国第一位共和党总统。林肯与道格拉斯之间的辩论，在美国历史上关键时刻，因其演说质量而至今仍被人们称颂。