US Presidential debates: Revisiting the most electrifying moments through the decades

1960: Kennedy vs. Nixon: when it was all televised

The 1960 debate between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon was inarguably a watershed moment in American political history, not just for the candidates in the race but also for how it reshaped the very nature of presidential campaigns in the years to come. It was the first-ever televised debate in the US — held on September 26, 1960 — and the impact of this medium of mass media on the outcome of the election was profound. For the first time, millions of Americans could assess their candidates not only by the substance of their ideas but also by their physical presence, demeanour, and ability to engage with the audience. At the time, Kennedy, a relatively unknown senator from Massachusetts, faced off against the sitting Vice-President Richard Nixon, a seasoned politician who had been on the national stage for years. On paper, Nixon was the favourite. He had more experience and had served eight years as Vice-President under Dwight D. Eisenhower, a highly popular figure. However, the television broadcast altered the dynamics of the campaign in ways no one could have predicted.

“In the election of 1860, Abraham Lincoln said the question was whether this nation could exist half-slave or half-free. In the election of 1960, and with the world around us, the question is whether the world will exist half-slave or half-free, whether it will move in the direction of freedom, in the direction of the road that we are taking, or whether it will move in the direction of slavery. I think it will depend in great measure upon what we do here in the United States, on the kind of society that we build, on the kind of strength that we maintain,” said a calm and charismatic Kennedy in his opening remarks. He appeared confident, well-prepared, and at ease. His youthful appearance and tan contrasted sharply with Nixon’s haggard and visible nervousness. Nixon, recovering from a recent knee injury, appeared under the weather. He refused to wear makeup, believing it to be unseemly, and this decision backfired; under the harsh studio lights, his pale, sweat-beaded face gave the impression of exhaustion.

The debate covered a wide range of topics, from foreign policy and the Cold War to domestic issues like the economy. Kennedy used the debate to present his vision of an energetic leadership that would usher in a new era for America. He talked about moving the country forward, his plan for the space race, and the need to confront the challenges posed by the Soviet Union. He promised change, framing the election as a choice between the status quo and a fresh, dynamic approach to governance. His singular focus on the future allowed him to win the day. So, while he didn’t necessarily outperform Nixon on the nitty-gritties of policies, his ability to communicate his ideas and project leadership on-screen set him apart. Nixon, for all his knowledge, struggled to match Kennedy’s confidence and ease. It was no wonder then that Kennedy emerged as the victor in the too-close-to-call election, becoming the first Roman Catholic and the youngest person — he was 43 then — elected as the president after Theodore Roosevelt.

1976: Ford vs. Carter, and a gaffe

The 1976 debate between incumbent President Gerald Ford and Democratic challenger Jimmy Carter might have been more measured in tone, but it became infamous for a single blunder that shaped the narrative around the election. When Ford declared, “"There is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe and there never will be under a Ford administration,” he left the audience stunned; Poland and Czechoslovakia were firmly under Soviet influence. In fact, the Soviet Union’s control over Eastern Europe was a foundational fact of the Cold War, and Ford’s misstatement played into Carter’s argument that the incumbent was out of touch with reality. Although Ford attempted to clarify his comment, the damage was done. His words became emblematic of a broader perception that his administration was disconnected from international affairs. In an era where foreign policy was central to U.S. politics, this gaffe may have cost Ford the election, and it underscored the importance of precision in debate rhetoric.

The gaffe was widely publicised, and Ford’s clumsy attempt to clarify his statement only deepened the damage. This moment contributed to a growing perception that Ford lacked the decisiveness and international savvy needed in a president during such a tense period of US-Soviet relations. Although the race remained tight until the end, the slip arguably cost Ford crucial momentum, helping Carter secure the presidency with a narrow victory.

1980: Reagan vs. Carter – “Are you better off?”

By the time Ronald Reagan faced off against President Jimmy Carter in 1980, the country was in the midst of economic recession, with inflation and unemployment soaring. Carter’s presidency had been battered by domestic and international crises, including the Iran hostage situation. Reagan, a former actor and governor of California, brought a mix of charm, wit, and memorable one-liners to the debate, most notably asking the audience: “Are you better off than you were four years ago?”

That question succinctly captured the frustrations of many Americans, framing the election in starkly personal terms. While Reagan came across as relaxed, Carter’s more earnest, weighty approach appeared sombre and lacked the warmth that resonated with the public. Reagan’s ability to distil complex issues into relatable language reassured voters and led to his landslide victory. The debate is widely remembered as a masterclass in effective communication.

1984: Reagan vs. Mondale – Age as a weapon

In 1984, Reagan, now 73 and seeking re-election, faced Democratic challenger Walter Mondale. Concerns about Reagan’s age had been simmering, especially after a lacklustre performance in the first debate where he appeared distracted. The pressure was on during the second debate to address those concerns, and Reagan did so in one of the most memorable lines in debate history.

When asked about his age, Reagan quipped, “I want you to know also I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit for political purposes my opponent’s youth and inexperience.” The audience erupted in laughter, and even Mondale smiled. In that moment, Reagan defused the issue of age, turning it into an asset with humour, and a timing that betrayed his seasoned experience as a communicator. It ultimately led to his overwhelming re-election victory.

1992: Bush, Clinton, and Perot – The Three-Way Clash

The 1992 debates introduced an unprecedented dynamic: a three-way contest featuring incumbent President George H.W. Bush, Democratic challenger Bill Clinton, and third-party candidate Ross Perot. These debates were electric, not only because of the presence of an outsider like Perot, who infused the discussions with direct populist appeal but also because of Clinton’s masterful command of the town hall format.

The most memorable moment came during the second debate, where Bush famously glanced at his watch during a voter’s question. It was a fleeting gesture, but it conveyed impatience and detachment to many viewers, reinforcing the perception that Bush was out of touch with everyday Americans. In contrast, Clinton empathised with the voters, walking up to the questioners, addressing their concerns with warmth. His approachability in that debate played a key role in his rise as a ‘man of the people’ and contributed to his ultimate victory.

2000: Bush vs. Gore – The sigh heard ‘round’ the world

The 2000 debate between the then Texas Governor George W. Bush and Vice-President Al Gore was tightly contested, but it became famous for a series of subtle missteps by Gore. During the first debate, Gore audibly sighed multiple times while Bush spoke, conveying exasperation. Though intended to express disagreement, the sighs were perceived as condescending and elitist.

This debate reinforced that small gestures can carry outsized influence in a high-stakes environment. Gore, who was considered the more experienced candidate, ended up losing ground as the sighs dominated post-debate analysis. Bush, meanwhile, projected a more relatable, affable posture, which played well with undecided voters. The 2000 election ultimately came down to a razor-thin margin.

2012: Obama vs. Romney – The power of the comeback

Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign was packed with memorable catchphrases, from the iconic ‘Yes, We Can’ to ‘Change We Can Believe In,’ signalling a fresh start in American politics. ‘The Audacity of Hope,’ which became the title of his bestselling book, carried the message of optimism, with ‘hope’ having become a one-word mantra that held people around the world— including this writer — in thrall; here was a man set to reclaim the American dream. Given this, the first debate between Obama, who was seeking to be re-elected, and Republican challenger Mitt Romney in 2012 was a surprising affair.

Obama, known for his rhetorical skills, was listless and unfocused, while Romney was aggressive and polished. Political pundits widely declared Romney the winner, and the president’s weak showing briefly shifted the momentum of the race. However, Obama made a comeback in the second debate. Held in a town hall format, the president was bursting with energy, sharp, and on message, at one point famously telling Romney that his critiques of Obama’s handling of the Libya attacks were ‘offensive.’ Obama’s rebound helped to reassert his leadership, paving the way for his re-election.

2016: Trump vs. Clinton – Chaos and insults

The 2016 debates between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were unlike anything seen in modern politics. Trump’s interruptions and mean personal attacks threw the traditional debate format into chaos. Clinton, who had a deep command of policy, tried to remain composed, but Trump played to the gallery with his cheap theatrics. One of the most talked-about moments came when Trump, looming behind Clinton during the second debate, created a sign that many interpreted as intimidating. The debates showcased the deep divides in American politics, with Trump’s supporters praising his anti-establishment rhetoric, while Clinton’s backers decried his lack of decorum. These debates threw into sharp relief just how, in the political discourse of America, policy had given way to populism. Though Clinton won the popular vote, Trump’s disruptive debate style seemed to have clicked and propelled him to victory.

2020: Trump vs. Biden – A clash of worlds

The first 2020 debate between incumbent President Donald Trump and former Vice-President Joe Biden was perhaps the most chaotic in US history. Trump interrupted Biden frequently, leading to what many described as an “unwatchable” debate. Moderator Chris Wallace struggled to maintain control as the candidates talked over each other, with Biden at one point telling Trump to “shut up, man.” While the debate was roundly criticised for its lack of substance, it showcased the polarising nature of the 2020 election. Biden focused on Trump’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, calling it a failure and promising a more science-driven approach. Throughout the debate, he harped on the need to restore the ‘soul of America,’ calling Trump a divisive leader who had stoked chaos for four years.

The second debate, with muted microphones, was far more civil, giving Biden space to articulate his policies on climate change, healthcare, and the economy, while Trump stuck to his talking points, insisting that the pandemic was under control and boasting of the economic success before COVID-19 hit, though Biden challenged these claims, citing the loss of lives and jobs, calling Trump’s leadership reckless and urging voters to take action for real change. Ultimately, it was Biden’s message of unity and healing — and not Trump’s combative rhetoric — that won the day. One hopes that Kamala Harris is able to pull of something similar.