Blog Stage Four: Substantial commentary or criticism #2

Katrina Vanden Heuvel, an American editor, publisher, and part-owner of the magazine "The Nation", criticizes the content and workings of the recent presidential debates in her article written under the Washington Post. The article she wrote was published on October 18, 2016, and is titled What if the next presidential debate actually covered critical issues?

 

Her intended audience is for those behind the operation of these presidential debates, such as the moderators, whom she believes are not asking the right questions for the presidential candidates, as well as the citizens of the United States, who she also urges to be willing to diversify the questions they ask for the presidential candidates, and not use those that everyone already knows so much about. Heuvel takes note that Chris Wallace is the next presidential debate moderator and goes on to say that it is a “fool’s errand to suggest that Wallace explore real issues rather than raking the muck over again” (par. 2), which shows that she doesn’t expect the next debate to be any different than the previous ones in terms of topic choices.

Some topics Heuvel addresses in her article that she feels should have been discussed in these recent presidential debates are things like climate change, where she quotes other sources such as the Pentagon to show that climate change poses a huge danger to not just the United States, but for the rest of the world. Another topic could be the crisis currently occurring in the Middle East, and the potential face off between the U.S. and Russia. All of these topics are ongoing issues that have existed, but as she points out, are not covered as extensively as other certain issues. Instead, silly things such as Clinton’s "damned emails" and "Trump’s predation" are discussed in its place.

I completely agree with Katrina Vanden Heuvel’s arguments in this article. After watching bits and pieces of some presidential debates, their discussions have often rotated around issues that I have heard numerous times. I also completely agree that issues such as the crisis in the Middle East must be addressed, especially if it would mean saving lives, as well as stabilizing the US's relationship with Russia. I would not want a World War 3. In regards to her argument about climate change, I did some research on this issue and I have to say that in my opinion, this is her most powerful argument. Climate change affects every single living person in the world. If the issue of climate change is left unresolved, I think the environment will be heavily devastated, different organisms can die off, and the world will be a very different place. Ultimately, like Heuvel believes, I hope that in future presidential debates they can offer a much wider range of questions for the candidates, and not stick to a limited and repetitive few.