Embarrassing, disgraceful, and pathetic. These are just some of the words that come to mind when reflecting on the Oct. 14 Senatorial debate between Republican candidate Herschel Walker and his Democratic opponent, Senator Raphael Warnock. Though not freighted with high expectations for Walker, the debate was a highly distasteful display of incompetence, poor statesmanship, and much worse. What’s more, the fact that the candidate that flubbed so much and displayed such a failed position in rhetoric has a chance at winning is just another example of the degradation of our modern politics.
From the beginning, Walker attempted to downplay the expectations of basic debate etiquette and competent argumentation. Weeks before the debate, Walker asserted that he was not as “proper” as Warnock, a comment that usually attempts to play at class divisions between members of the African American community. Doing so notes MSNBC’s Jarvis DeBerry, allowed Walker to call “attention to a divide that persists in the South: the divide between the educated Black people who speak what’s called “proper” and the less educated who might be considered more common, less refined people.” Such appeals, though strategically sound, also serve another purpose, albeit less nefarious.
Instead of merely appealing to the constituency’s conception of the common people, Walker’s attempt to denigrate Warnock’s rhetoric and prose is yet another attempt by a Republican to engage in anti-intellectualism in the face of actual class issues that affect people’s lives. It also helps him avoid criticism of his staggering inability to take a coherent position.
That was painfully on display when Walker, seemingly out of nowhere, decided to blame people with diabetes for their need for insulin, saying, “at the same time, you got to eat right,” adding that “unless you’re eating right, insulin is doing you no good.” Those strange moments, however, were somewhat dulled by Walker’s previously mentioned attempts to downplay the significance of his prose and appeals to class divisions within the electorate. With this in mind, it is worth noting that this debate should have been a layup for Warnock, but he played a more cautious hand, save for one particular moment.
Warnock’s performance, though not as horrific as Walker’s, was no less tepid. Perhaps he was looking to show a more cautious hand than Walker, thus displaying a more controlled, statesmanlike appearance. However, there were very few moments where Warnock directly hit back. He did his best to defend his position on abortion, accusing Walker of “giving to government more power than God has….” Still, Warnock was evasive in his position regarding the level of restriction he would permit for abortion, making Walker’s position on the issue slightly stronger. However, where Walker threw as many attacks as possible with little policy, there was one salient moment that Warnock pushed: he confronted Walker about his consistent lying about affiliation with law enforcement.
In his response to Walker accusing him of demoralizing police, Warnock chastised Walker, saying, “I’ve never pretended to be a police officer, and I’ve never threatened a shootout with the police….” That, in turn, baited Walker to pull out a badge that he claimed allowed him to “work with” law enforcement. It is worth noting that the badge in question is honorary, and Walker has never served in law enforcement or the FBI, another claim he has made.
Still, with Warnock and Walker neck and neck in this race, it would have been nice for Warnock to bury Walker and demonstrate how completely unqualified he is for public office. If there is anything that this debate showed, it is that intelligence, composure, and dignity in the office are not guaranteed in America’s elections.
