Howard Dean and Rick Santorum spoke here at Pick-Staiger to Northwestern students at a student group-sponsored event, so it’s only appropriate that their debate be judged college-style. Let’s gauge them on the classic pop-quiz grading scale-check-plus, check, or check-minus.
For successfully engaging the student-dominated audience with lively debate over the role of the youth in a polarized political climate, we award the former Vermont governor and the ex-senator from Pennsylvania a check. Occasional hewing to party demagoguery on the policy questions-and in Santorum’s case, statements typical of a possible presidential contender- kept the debate from being a check-plus-worthy.
Nevertheless, from the opening statements to the good-natured jibes at the political leanings of an undoubtedly overwhelmingly liberal audience, it was clear that the politicians were making a concentrated effort to put the national and international issues being discussed in context for the student body. In this regard, the debate admirably avoided becoming solely boilerplate back-and-forth. Dean and Santorum, both currently without public office, sought to crystallize the opposing views on the path and attitudes youth voters must adopt as they gain more political clout. Together with the moderator, they sustained this theme throughout the debate, returning time and again to either applaud the youth for not rushing to adopt hard-line views and demanding a conclusion to long-running policy debate (Dean) or chastise the youth culture of over-tolerance and “reticence” to take diametrically opposing views (Santorum).
While Dean and Santorum clearly differed on the majority of policy issues, their surprisingly frequent displays of agreement might have the greatest impact on the student body. For example, they jointly pointed out and corrected common fiscal and foreign policy misconceptions, agreed that certain issues are not clearly “Democrat vs. Republican,” and showed little light between their opinions on the role of the filibuster. Their joint emphasis that explorations of common ground and civil discussion of divisions- like this debate itself- actually occur quite regularly at all levels of government should foster constructive dialogue in the student body.
The well-publicized, generally well-run event – itself an admirable display by NU’s College Democrats and College Republications of across-the-aisle cooperation- veered into the almost requisite policy questions for long stretches of the two hour-long debate, but not to the point where most students present would have felt overlooked in favor of the national audience. Dean and Santorum, both accustomed to parrying on the national level, took care to reframe the questions and refocus their answers to directly address the role and future of youth.
Their exhortations to the youth to get involved and stay involved in politics at any and all levels went beyond trite “inspirational” language and were instead rooted in a discussion of generational differences and their impact on policies and politics. The controversy-dogged partisans more than adequately delivered the substance that the celebrity-driven buzz around the debate had promised.
