I have watched a number of debates over the years. I have watched Reagan debate Carter; Thatcher debate Michael Foot; Bush and Dukakis. I watched all of the Obama debates and most of the Canadian election debates; and I have come to identify moments in debates that I call the "Dukakis" question that can win or lose a campaign.
In 1988 Michael Dukakis and George Bush Sr met in debate.
Dukakis, an opponent of the death penalty was asked this question by Bernard Shaw at the very start of the debate.
Shaw: Governor, if Kitty Dukakis were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?
DUKAKIS: No, I don't, Bernard. And I think you know that I've opposed the death penalty during all of my life. I don't see any evidence that it's a deterrent, and I think there are better and more effective ways to deal with violent crime. We've done so in my own state. And it's one of the reasons why we have had the biggest drop in crime of any industrial state in America; why we have the lowest murder rate of any industrial state in America. But we have work to do in this nation. We have work to do to fight a real war, not a phony war, against drugs. And that's something I want to lead, something we haven't had over the course of the past many years, even though the Vice President has been at least allegedly in charge of that war. We have much to do to step up that war, to double the number of drug enforcement agents, to fight both here and abroad, to work with our neighbors in this hemisphere. And I want to call a hemispheric summit just as soon after the 20th of January as possible to fight that war. But we also have to deal with drug education prevention here at home. And that's one of the things that I hope I can lead personally as the President of the United States. We've had great success in my own state. And we've reached out to young people and their families and been able to help them by beginning drug education and prevention in the early elementary grades. So we can fight this war, and we can win this war. And we can do so in a way that marshals our forces, that provides real support for state and local law enforcement officers who have not been getting that support, and do it in a way which will bring down violence in this nation, will help our youngsters to stay away from drugs, will stop this avalanche of drugs that's pouring into the country, and will make it possible for our kids and our families to grow up in safe and secure and decent neighborhoods.
One of the most horrific questions had just been non-answered as if delivering a lecture on crime in America.
After Dukakis had finished answering this question, his Presidential hopes were all but ended.
This occurred while listening to Bernie Sanders reply to this question:
Cooper: You — the — the Republican attack ad against you in a general election — it writes itself. You supported the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. You honeymooned in the Soviet Union. And just this weekend, you said you’re not a capitalist.
This was the question that Sanders needed to be asked and the question he needed to crush in answering.
This was not the time for lectures, this was not the time for logic. This was the type of question that needed to be answered with PASSION.
This was Bernie Sanders "Dukakis" question.
This is what we got:
SANDERS: Well, first of all, let’s look at the facts. The facts that are very simple. Republicans win when there is a low voter turnout, and that is what happened last November.
Sixty-three percent of the American people didn’t vote, Anderson. Eighty percent of young people didn’t vote. We are bringing out huge turnouts, and creating excitement all over this country.
Democrats at the White House on down will win, when there is excitement and a large voter turnout, and that is what this campaign is doing.
Short response. Sanders blew his chance. Instead of answering directly and forcefully; mocking the question, identifying its source, clarifying the record and owning the statement about capitalism, Bernie lectured.
Now of course it is damage control time with his supporters accusing Cooper of Red-baiting, but that is irrelevant. Dukakis' supporters were furious at Shaw for his ugly question as well, but it did not good; the damage was done.
Unfortunately for Sanders, he had a second "Dukakis" question that injured him even more:
Cooper: Senator Sanders, you voted against the Brady bill that mandated background checks and a waiting period. You also supported allowing riders to bring guns in checked bags on Amtrak trains. For a decade, you said that holding gun manufacturers legally responsible for mass shootings is a bad idea. Now, you say you’re reconsidering that. Which is it: shield the gun companies from lawsuits or not?
SANDERS: Let’s begin, Anderson, by understanding that Bernie Sanders has a D-minus voting rating from the NRA. Let’s also understand that back in 1988 when I first ran for the United States Congress, way back then, I told the gun owners of the state of Vermont and I told the people of the state of Vermont, a state which has virtually no gun control, that I supported a ban on assault weapons. And over the years, I have strongly avoided instant background checks, doing away with this terrible gun show loophole. And I think we’ve got to move aggressively at the federal level in dealing with the straw man purchasers.
Also I believe, and I’ve fought for, to understand that there are thousands of people in this country today who are suicidal, who are homicidal, but can’t get the healthcare that they need, the mental healthcare, because they don’t have insurance or they’re too poor. I believe that everybody in this country who has a mental crisis has got to get mental health counseling immediately.
Sigh. No Bernie, the problem with guns in the United States isn't mentally ill people. The problem with guns in the United States is that they are too easy to get.
This was followed by what I found to be the strangest Bernie Sanders answer to any question I have ever heard:
SANDERS: As a senator from a rural state, what I can tell Secretary Clinton, that all the shouting in the world is not going to do what I would hope all of us want, and that is keep guns out of the hands of people who should not have those guns and end this horrible violence that we are seeing.
I believe that there is a consensus in this country. A consensus has said we need to strengthen and expand instant background checks, do away with this gun show loophole, that we have to address the issue of mental health, that we have to deal with the strawman purchasing issue, and that when we develop that consensus, we can finally, finally do something to address this issue.
“all the shouting in the world is not going to do what I would hope all of us want”
When it comes to income inequality; Bernie Sanders shouts.
When it comes to Wall Street; Bernie Sanders shouts.
When it comes to Too Big To Fail; Bernie Sanders shouts.
But when it comes to gun control, Bernie Sanders is uncharacteristically quiet and says “shouting doesn't work.”
Based on my past experience with debates; I would say those were the moments Bernie Sanders lost the debate.
No, he hasn't lost any support but he won't have gained much either; and that was what he needed to do in this debate.
UPDATE: Okay, I am going to explain "Dukakis Moment" again because from the comments it is clear many think I am comparing Sanders with Michael Dukakis. No, that is not correct. A "Dukakis Moment" is when a question is asked or an event occurs that can make or break a campaign. (BTW - in Canada they were called "Stanfield moments" for the same reason).
The point of the diary: Bernie Sanders had a chance to change the narrative about him ; just as Dukakis did in 1988. He failed to do that and may have hurt his election chances by that failure.
That was the question: Was this his "Dukakis Moment"?
Now back to regularly scheduled broadcasting.