School News & Student Content

Three Veritas seniors penned editorial pieces regarding our democratic debates and submitted them to LNP. Read them here.

Erin Casey, Veritas Senior

The presidential debates are a traditional and important part of the election process. Americans of all backgrounds can enjoy and learn from these debates whether they are passionate about politics or are largely disinterested in them. The debates are enthralling to those who follow politics actively because they are a concise culmination of all the months of heated discussion, Twitter threads, accusations, and victory strategies of both candidates, which gives them a chance to hear the parties compare and criticize each other’s ideas. People who remain generally indifferent to politics can learn what the candidates believe about relevant issues of the time and what their public strategies are going to be if they are elected. These debates are unlike regular press conferences, speeches, or the candidate’s individual rallies because they are supposed to be moderated by a neutral party who asks questions that are unknown to the debaters until the debate occurs. This experience gives room for the candidates to openly interact with each other and help voters understand each nominee’s policies and defenses of their ideas. For these reasons, the debates, although not mandatory, are very helpful for Americans in the election process.

The first debate between President Trump and former Vice President Biden was unorthodox and controversial. This is unsurprising as both candidates seem to consistently evoke such feelings directed at their words, actions, and strategies. Different conclusions were drawn about what was right and wrong in the debate, but a majority of viewers believed both parties behaved inappropriately and did not display proper debate behavior.

I attend a classical Christian school, and at this school students learn and practice rhetoric and debate skills frequently. Based on what I have learned in school, I personally believe that both debaters displayed debate tactics that were informal and both could have improved, but that they also implemented skills that are beneficial when debating and speaking persuasively.

President Trump has a strong and commanding presence while speaking, which is an important skill to have. There are pros and cons to this attribute. Since he had much confidence and boldness when speaking, he came across as a strong and fearless man, which is appealing to many voters and may have given him the upper hand. However, since his opponent did not display as much boldness, President Trump appeared rude and inconsiderate at times. Confidence and assertiveness is necessary to energize listeners and demonstrate leadership, but the President may have taken it too far and overwhelmed too many people with his conduct especially as contrasted to the persona of his opponent.

Vice President Biden is often soft spoken and more emotional which is another important characteristic to have when speaking in order to gain the favor of the listeners. Biden, especially in contrast with his opponent, often appeared kind and emotional. It is important to emotionally connect with one’s audience because humankind is both rational and emotional and to effectively appeal to someone it is important to appeal to both elements of their mind. Both debaters had moments and qualities that positively defined their attractiveness as potential presidential candidates, but both could have improved in order to appeal to a wider variety of people and to also draw the focus of the post-debate criticism away from their conduct and rhetorical skill and instead towards the much more important issues of their political beliefs and goals.

Veritas Academy has helped me learn and practice debating and discussing throughout my years of education there. I have learned how to discuss my ideas with my peers and how to respectfully disagree with my classmates. Throughout the years my class has engaged in many passionate debates. By learning to listen to, and respect the ideas of others in a formal manner, my classmates and I are uniquely prepared to interact with beliefs that contradict our own without being uncivil. We are trained to look at issues discussed from every angle, and not allow emotions or bias to influence our conclusion on right and wrong. This will be a useful skill for the rest of our lives, and I speak on behalf of my class when I say that we are all better debaters because of our classical education and how it prepares us to think and reason.

Sarah Trimbath and Karis Fischer, Veritas Seniors

This letter is concerning our observations of the first presidential debate. There are several problems we noticed throughout this debate, some of which are the following: structure, delivery, and decorum.

First off, there seemed to be little to no structure to the presidential debate. For example, the monitor’s prompts were completely disregarded as each candidate chose to talk only about the topics they wanted to address. Another consequence of this poor structure was that, because of the clashes between both nominees, the questions were never really answered.

Secondly, the delivery of both candidates was abominable. They lacked professionalism as well as clear structure to address their topics. They targeted each other's morals and past actions instead of challenging each other's policies.

Lastly, both nominees lacked decorum and respect for each other. Both sides constantly interrupted each other and the monitor. Trump specifically spoke out of turn and Biden frequently told him to shut up.

We have been so thankful to grow up at a school that teaches us how to respectfully disagree yet still keep an open mind toward others’ opinions. We have been trained to do this through our discussion-based classes. We have been able to practice decorum in our rhetoric class, specifically during our own debates. We hope to see improved rhetoric and increased respect for others in the upcoming presidential debates.