People naturally differ over who won the Great Debate. If you are a Donald Trump admirer you will say he really socked it to her. How could anyone otherwise interpret those facial expressions, those pouted lips and rolls of the eyes, those clever barbs such as that not paying taxes makes him smart, and his insisting with an absolute straight face that he has the better temperament and judgment.
If you are a Hillary Clinton devotee, well ... Let’s just say she came across as decidedly more measured than her opponent. Whatever the merits of her arguments, it was obvious she was far better prepared.
Though my bias might be shining through a bit, the point I am really trying to make is not so much who won. That decision is up to the American electorate. Ultimately it is going to come down to a test of their good judgment.
What those voters should have no illusions about is the gravity of their verdict. For what really struck me about the debate, as has been the case with just about everything else about this extraordinary American election campaign, was the enormity of it all.
There I was in the small hours of the morning sitting glued to my television screen. The debate on the far side of the Atlantic happened when most of my South African compatriots were still sound asleep, as with the rest of Africa, Europe and all who are in more or less the same time zone. But from what I understand I was by far not the only one to have lost sleep over the contest.
Much as we like to deride the American electoral process as comical and even farcical at times, it is sobering to think that I was one of an estimated 100-million, and probably more, television viewers who watched the debate.
There was an element about it of the Super Bowl. South Africans and New Zealanders keep similar odd hours when their rugby teams meet across their different time zones. (This might have changed somewhat now that New Zealand’s All Black prowess and South Africa’s Springbok decline has made the results rather predictable. But that will change …)
I found myself suffering a touch of nostalgia as, wrapped in a blanket, I watched the Clinton-Trump contest unfold. It took my thoughts back to the time Muhammad Ali burst on the scene. South Africa did not have television yet, so it often had one sitting in the dark with the ear glued to the radio to follow his fights.
American presidential elections are indeed spectacular affairs. It is right that they play out in front of global audiences, like grand sporting events. It is after all the world’s mightiest office that is being vied for.
Yes, it often has us shake our heads at the quality of the candidates, the quality of their arguments and, most disquieting of all, the quality of the electors who have to choose that leader. But what other country in the world puts its aspirant leaders through such rigorous and spectacular public performance? Certainly not Russia, or China, or just about any other one I can think of.
(I shudder to think what would happen if South Africa’s own President Jacob Zuma had to be subjected to similar face-offs on television. But that’s another story.)
For all the quirkiness of democracy American style, it remains a powerful and riveting game to follow. Its implications for all the rest of us are far-reaching. All we can hope for is that those doing the voting will not disappoint us.
Read next
From @lmar