評(píng)論
打印
United States
美國(guó)版塊
Lexington
萊克星頓專(zhuān)欄
The end of the debate
總統(tǒng)辯論的結(jié)束
The president turns a globally respected American institution into a national embarrassment
特朗普總統(tǒng)使本來(lái)備受推崇的競(jìng)選辯論這一美國(guó)制度淪為全國(guó)笑柄。
Among the institutions Donald Trump has attacked in the past three and a half years, the televised presidential debate might not seem much. It does not guarantee the rule of law, protect the environment or defend the homeland. It has hardly ever been electorally significant. Maybe only the first televised duel, which pitted a sweaty, shady looking Richard Nixon against a youthful, make-up wearing John Kennedy in 1960, materially affected a race. Yet at a time when some of the most basic assumptions about American democracy are being challenged by Mr Trump’s scorched-earth presidency, as he illustrated with a debate performance of stunning brutishness in Cleveland on September 29th, the merits of the format are worth recalling.
在過(guò)去三年半中，唐納德·特朗普抨擊了許多制度，但是他卻沒(méi)怎么提到總統(tǒng)電視辯論。總統(tǒng)電視辯論既不能保障法治，也不能保護(hù)環(huán)境，更沒(méi)法保衛(wèi)國(guó)家。它對(duì)于大選的影響并不大。也許只有1960年進(jìn)行的第一屆總統(tǒng)電視辯論實(shí)質(zhì)性地影響到了美國(guó)大選。當(dāng)時(shí)，滿頭大汗、臉色陰暗的理查德·尼克松與年輕且化著妝的約翰·肯尼迪進(jìn)行了對(duì)決。然而，美國(guó)民主的一些最基本的假定正在被特朗普的焦土政策毀壞，正如9月29日在克利夫蘭舉行的首場(chǎng)總統(tǒng)辯論上，特朗普的魯莽表現(xiàn)令人咂舌。這時(shí)，總統(tǒng)電視辯論形式的優(yōu)點(diǎn)令人回顧。
Before this week they were threefold. The president, setting aside the exalted status and electoral advantages of incumbency, must submit to the same pre-agreed rules as his challenger. (No president since Nixon, following his humiliation in 1960, has ducked the format.) Second— and notwithstanding a mountain of evidence that most people do not vote on the basis of such things— debates affirm the importance of plans and ideas. This projects a degree of seriousness that is otherwise largely absent from most political coverage.
這個(gè)星期之前舉辦過(guò)的總統(tǒng)電視辯論有三點(diǎn)值得懷念。總統(tǒng)要拋開(kāi)崇高地位和在任優(yōu)勢(shì)，和競(jìng)爭(zhēng)者一樣遵從相同的預(yù)先商定的規(guī)則。（自1960年尼克松受辱以來(lái)，沒(méi)有一位總統(tǒng)回避過(guò)這種形式。）其次，電視辯論肯定了總統(tǒng)的計(jì)劃和想法的重要性，盡管有大量證據(jù)表明，大多數(shù)人不會(huì)基于這些東西進(jìn)行投票。這表明了某種程度的嚴(yán)肅性，而這一點(diǎn)被大多數(shù)政治報(bào)道所忽視。
The candidates’ competing proposals also underline the degree to which elections are a choice. And because they are essentially making their pitches to a vast television audience, the debates also underline how that the choice falls to ordinary Americans. Boosted by a paucity of campaigning because of covid-19, the 90-minute, ad-free event in Cleveland was watched by an estimated 80m, over half the electorate. Millions more watched around the world— which speaks to a third quality of the presidential debate.
候選人的競(jìng)選提案也凸顯了選舉的選擇程度。總統(tǒng)電視辯論實(shí)際上是在向廣大電視觀眾宣傳，因此辯論也強(qiáng)調(diào)了這種選擇權(quán)是如何落入普通美國(guó)人手中的。受到新冠肺炎疫情的影響，競(jìng)選活動(dòng)寥寥無(wú)幾，在克利夫蘭舉行的為時(shí)90分鐘的無(wú)廣告的活動(dòng)吸引了8000萬(wàn)觀眾，超過(guò)半數(shù)選民觀看。世界各地有數(shù)百萬(wàn)人觀看了這場(chǎng)總統(tǒng)辯論。這表明了總統(tǒng)電視辯論值得懷念的第三個(gè)方面。
譯文由可可原創(chuàng)，僅供學(xué)習(xí)交流使用，未經(jīng)許可請(qǐng)勿轉(zhuǎn)載。
