“I love argument. I love debate. I don’t expect anyone just to sit there and agree with me. That’s not their job.” – former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher

I can’t decide if I believe in having political candidate debates anymore.

That’s kind of a wild take given the importance of debate in both American and world political history.

Without debate we might have been deprived of our greatest president. Abraham Lincoln’s debates with Illinois U.S. Sen. Stephen Douglas springboarded Lincoln into becoming a national figure in 1850s America.

In ancient Athens, citizens themselves could debate the merits of a proposed law and then vote the proposal up or down in its direct democracy form of government.

The problem for debates is people must care for them to be useful, yet time and again people prove they do not. A few people do, but we will get to them in a minute.

If people insisted on debates, Gov. Kay Ivey might not be in her record-breaking 10^th year in office. Like the narrator in the “How the Grinch Stole Christmas” television special, she would not touch a debate with a 39-and-a-half-foot pole.

Political advisers now counsel any candidate leading in pre-election polling to leave debates alone. Debates only offer heartache if the public is unwilling to punish candidates who avoid them.

In fact, Alabama had a recent fascinating case study of this phenomenon in the 2022 U.S. Senate Republican primary. Then-candidate Katie Britt was quite critical of fellow office seeker Mike Durant when he refused to participate in a debate while he briefly held the lead in polling for the Republican nomination.

Consequently, when Britt and Mo Brooks ended up making the runoff election without Durant, she suddenly changed her tune when it was she who had the commanding polling lead. Her campaign manager said something about not participating “in the final circus act of Mo’s career,” according to AL.com’s Paul Gattis.

Was Britt duplicitous? Yep. Was it the obvious political move? Also, yep. The proof is in the pudding since Britt now has the suite in the Russell Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C.

Current gubernatorial frontrunner Tommy Tuberville beat his Democratic opponent, Doug Jones, in the 2020 race for Alabama’s other Senate seat without debating him.

Tuberville appears poised to repeat the same debate strategy this year, and, once again, no outcry arises from the people demanding debate.

Now there are a few people who are interested in debates. They are the people who follow politics and current events. Even if you would prefer a root canal over watching a two-hour debate, you probably know a few of these people.

Ideally, these are the people on whom you would rely to tell you who presented the better plan for your future. The problem is the people who are most interested also tend to be the most partisan.

Ask a Democrat which candidate fared best, and he will tell you the Democrat demolished the competition. Ask a Republican, and she will say the Democrat never stood a chance.

More people used to be interested in debates when entertainment options were limited. Even if candidates debating the finer points of banking regulations did not blow wind up your skirt, there was usually enough drama generated by both the verbal attacks among the debaters and their oratory abilities.

But even Honest Abe would have a hard time drawing an audience if he was up against various Housewife-themed tantrums or the glut of shows and podcasts featuring fast-talking guys who say you’d be a fool not to take the under on Sunday afternoon’s Jets versus Titans game.

We would rather watch candidates flub their lines and post the resulting memes on Facebook than thoughtfully consider their vision. So why should we make candidates go through the motions?

Well, there is one huge counter example you might be screaming at your screen right now. We had been told President Joe Biden’s cognition was in decline, but it was difficult to know for sure until his disastrous debate performance in June 2024.

That debate brutally exposed his mental sharpness was far from what it was even four years earlier, so a debate certainly made a difference in that race.

However, back here in Alabama, there have been concerns about how mentally and physically fit our 81-year-old governor is. Her advisers do all they can to keep her public appearances within highly controlled environments.

How much should a governor be involved in the day-to-day workings and overall vision of Alabama’s executive branch? That answer is not up for debate unless we begin to insist on it.