News

The final two, it must be said, were pretty dull affairs, thanks to a moderator who appeared determined to prevent spontaneity or spark.

But the 10th Republican presidential candidates debate on Wednesday and the 16th Democratic debate yesterday, both in Iowa and sponsored by the Des Moines Register, marked the culmination of eight months of jousts that have defined and dominated this campaign.

The debates have strengthened the burgeoning power of the Web, brought one candidate from the back of the pack to the front and turned inevitable victory into too-close-to-call.

"They have created an opportunity for a much more diverse set of issues to come forward, and for a much more issue-oriented discussion to occur," believes Steve Koch, a professor of communications and specialist in political debates at Capital University in Columbus, Ohio. "And I think that's highly positive."

In past primary campaigns, incumbent or dominant candidates were able to limit the number of debates that they would agree to attend. But in this election, with both parties fielding candidates almost by the dozen, and with no one contender strong enough to force a cancellation simply by refusing to appear, the result has been a plethora of debates, invariably televised by one cable news network or another.

Those debates have been most revealing. Barack Obama lost more than he gained by the experience. His discomfort with the format was palpable and his fumbling on a couple of foreign policy questions reminded viewers of his inexperience.

John Edwards used the Oct. 30 debate in Philadelphia to accuse Hillary Clinton of being part of "a broken system that's corrupt in Washington, D.C." It would become his dominant, virtually exclusive, message during the closing weeks of the campaign.

And Ms. Clinton's aura of inevitability began to fade, when she found herself the focus of relentless attacks from other candidates, and when her calculating and sometimes confusing answers reinforced the impression that her persona was manufactured.

But the debates had an even greater impact on the Republican side, by propelling Mike Huckabee into the front ranks of the contest. The affable Baptist completely outperformed actor Fred Thompson, who seemed lost without scriptwriters. Once southern conservatives and evangelical Christians decided that Mr. Huckabee was a more credible candidate than Mr. Thompson, the former's fortunes soared while the latter's plummeted.

The debates also revealed the burgeoning political influence of the Internet. The CNN/YouTube debates, despite controversies over political favouritism, demonstrated that amateurs -- at least a select group culled from thousands of entries -- can be much savvier at asking politicians questions than professional reporters.

Mitt Romney can protest, as he did, that it was undignified for presidential candidates to have to answer questions from a snowman about global warming, but both debates brought in more than four million viewers.

And who didn't want to hear the Republican candidates answer the young man who asked what they thought Jesus would do about the death penalty?

(Mr. Huckabee scored by replying, "Jesus was too smart to ever run for public office.")

But Prof. Koch believes the real power of the Internet comes from its ability to broaden the pool of judges deciding who won and who lost after each debate.

"At one time it would have been left to a few columnists and experts to talk about the impact of the debate," he observed. This year, the many thousands of contributors to the blogosphere produced the real buzz.

"The Internet impact on post-debate discussion has generated a lot more interest in and a lot more spinoff from the debates," he said. "We've come that far even since 2000 and 2004."

Ironically, as the 2007 debates finally ended, most of the real activity this week was taking place offstage, in a flurry of apologies.

Mr. Huckabee offered his in person to Mr. Romney at the conclusion of Wednesday's debate, after it was revealed that he had asked a reporter whether it was true that Mormons believed that the devil was Christ's brother. Mr. Romney has struggled to convince conservative Christian voters that they need not fear his Mormon faith.

And yesterday Ms. Clinton phoned Mr. Obama to apologize for the remarks of one of her senior strategists in New Hampshire, who told a reporter that, if Mr. Obama won the nomination, the Republicans would crucify him over his admitted drug use when he was a teenager.

Neither candidate was grilled about those remarks during the Des Moines debates, which may be why they were so soporific. There was, however, one moment of grace near the very end.

Carolyn Washburn, editor of the Register and moderator, asked Senator Joe Biden whether several verbal gaffes --including the one in which he referred to Barack Obama as "clean and articulate" -- indicated "that you are uncomfortable talking about race."

When Mr. Biden replied that anyone who had studied his record would realize that he had made the fight for minority rights the touchstone of his political career, the other candidates applauded and called out "hear, hear," and Mr. Obama assured viewers that "Joe is on the right side of the issues and is fighting every day for a better America."

With less than three weeks until the Iowa caucuses, no debates left in the meantime, and Christmas coming up, it would be nice to dream that things might stay that civil.

Nice, but naive.

jibbitson@globeandmail.com