How the Lincoln-Douglas Debates Caused the Custom of Presidential Debates

Nadene Goldfoot                                            

Who started presidential elections with debates? " Lincoln. In 1858, running against incumbent Stephen A. Douglas for Senator of Illinois, Lincoln challenged Douglas “for you and myself to divide time, and address the same audiences.” Why he did this, and what came of their seven debates, is the story told Between the Lines here.

Remember, there was no radio or TV or tapes to allow people other than those who came to the debate to hear or watch.  They depended on newspapers.  

The incumbent was rich, powerful, and charismatic; the challenger awkward, unsung, and worked for a living. But when Stephen A. Douglas, nicknamed by his national following the “Little Giant”, faced off in the 1858 Illinois’ senatorial race against a Springfield lawyer and one-term ex-Congressman named Abraham Lincoln, history was about to be upended – although how, exactly, wouldn’t be obvious until two years later.     

Stephen A. Douglas, Senator
 

 What happened, that late summer and early fall of 1858, was a debate – or rather, seven of them, between Lincoln and Douglas, over three months, in which Lincoln and Douglas, sharing a platform, took turns delivering one-hour opening addresses, one and a half hour  replies, and half-hour rejoinders. That this epic series came to take place at all, however, is largely owing to this brief Lincoln letter about a campaign stop.

Douglas decided that the  first debate to be held on August 21, and the last, on October 15.  It was not until the publication, in 1860, of The Political Debates between Hon. Abraham Lincoln and Hon. Stephen A. Douglas that the legend of the Lincoln-Douglas Debates truly began.

Lincoln was given a hundred copies of the Debates – by the Republican publisher Follet, Foster and Company – to distribute to friends.  Only 4 copies, however, are signed in ink.

Lincoln's remarks in Springfield depict the danger of slavery-based disunion, and it rallied Republicans across the North. Along with the Gettysburg Address and his Second Inaugural Address, the speech became one of the best-known of his career. It begins with the following words, which became the best-known passage of the speech:

"A house divided against itself, cannot stand."

I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free.

I do not expect the Union to be dissolved — I do not expect the house to fall — but I do expect it will cease to be divided.

It will become all one thing or all the other.

Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become lawful in all the States, old as well as new — North as well as South." 

Lincoln's goals were to differentiate himself from Douglas — the incumbent — and to voice a prophecy publicly. Douglas had long advocated popular sovereignty, under which the settlers in each new territory would decide their own status as a slave or free state; he had repeatedly asserted that the proper application of popular sovereignty would prevent slavery-induced conflict and would allow Northern and Southern states to resume their peaceful coexistence. Lincoln, however, responded that the Dred Scott decision had closed the door on Douglas's preferred option, leaving the Union with only two remaining outcomes: the country would inevitably become either all slave or all free. Now that the North and the South had come to hold distinct opinions in the question of slavery, and now the issue had come to permeate every other political question, the Union would soon no longer be able to function.

What happened, that late summer and early fall of 1858, was a debate – or rather, seven of them, between Lincoln and Douglas, over three months, in which Lincoln and Douglas, sharing a platform, took turns delivering one-hour opening addresses, one and a half hour replies, and half-hour rejoinders. That this epic series came to take place at all, however, is largely owing to this brief Lincoln letter about a campaign stop. 

Debating in various forms has a long history and can be traced back to the philosophical and political debates of Ancient Greece, such as Athenian democracy, and Shastrartha in Ancient India. Modern forms of debating and the establishment of debating societies occurred during the Age of Enlightenment in the 18th century.

The presidential debates were initially moderated in 1976(Ford), 1980(Carter), and 1984(Reagan) by the League of Women Voters, but the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) was established in 1987 by the Republican and Democratic parties. 

After studying the election process in 1985, the bipartisan National Commission on Elections recommended "[t]urning over the sponsorship of presidential debates to the two major parties." My opinion is that this was a bad move.  I say put it in the hands of as non-political debating society.                                  

The presidential debate's primary purpose is to sponsor and produce debates for the United States presidential and vice presidential candidates and to undertake research and educational activities relating to the debates.The organization, which is a nonprofit, nonpartisan corporation, sponsored all of the presidential debates in 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012, 2016, and 2020.

In schools and colleges, competitive debating often takes the form of a contest with explicit rules. It may be presided over by one or more judges or adjudicators. Both sides seek to win against the other while following the rules. One side is typically in favor of (also known as "for", "Affirmative", or "Pro") or opposed to (also known as "against", "Negative", "Con") a statement, proposition, moot or Resolution. The "for" side must state points that will support the proposition; the "against" side must refute these arguments sufficiently to falsify the other side. The "against" side is not required to propose an alternative but it must substantiate its own negation if no other position is possible.                

For instance, let x be a boolean. If the "for" side says x = true, the "against" side must say x = false. The "against" side cannot simply say "I am not convinced that x = true" if they both want a debate. Both sides are required to embrace and defend their own positions. Otherwise, it is not a debate but simply a discussion of a controversy where one side solely attempts to convince the other side or the other listeners to its position."

Resource:

www.debates.org

https://www.shapell.org/historical-perspectives/between-the-lines/lincoln-douglas-debates/?gclid=CjwKCAjwlbr8BRA0EiwAnt4MToDbsvl9So6jUmMDky4qWTrgZjsDXIwHtl1j34Lo7g5wDzAW50_L4hoCyHwQAvD_BwE

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln%27s_House_Divided_Speech

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate