Why French Presidential Debates are Rough Business

The first Obama-Romney debate is scheduled for Wednesday in Denver.

On the eve of this momentous political event, we hear how our presidential debates compare to those in France where the last president was elected in May.

Newsweek Paris Bureau Chief Christopher Dickey says political debates there are a test of knowledge, endurance and self-control.

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Marco Werman: It’s a big week for politics here in the US, too. The first Obama-Romney debate is scheduled for tomorrow in Denver, and that got us thinking about how other countries handle presidential debates. Christopher Dickey is Newsweek’s Paris Bureau Chief. He says political debates in France tend to be rougher than American ones, and that goes for the last French presidential debate in Paris.

Christopher Dickey: The debate between Francois Hollande and Nicolas Sarkozy in May leading up to the election of Hollande was just really a knock down, drag out affair. It all sounds very intellectual because the French like to be very cool and part of the game to draw your opponent offsides and make him sound as though he is out of control and crazy, especially in the case of Sarkozy, who was a little out of control and crazy.

Werman: Tell us what you mean. How was he out of control?

Dickey: The big reason that Sarkozy lost the election is that he’s not a man with a lot of obvious self-control. In fact, he’s a man with a lot of obvious lack of self-control. He’s very twitchy, he’s nervous, he’s very, very intense. People have compared him to sort of Joe Pesci, the gangster actor. And Hollande, his whole game was to appear presidential and cool but not weak. So even though both of them were citing numbers and statistics all the way through the debate, the real game was a psychological game to see if Sarkozy would blow up or get too belligerent, and he did, whereas Hollande was expected to be sort of a milquetoast, and would up looking much more firm and resolute, and it really put him over the top, although he was leading in the polls at that point.

Werman: In the French debates, though, it’s got to be said, there’s a huge window of opportunity to really kind of like throw yourself under the bus. I mean, three hours to debate with no notes. That’s incredible.

Dickey: Well, that’s right, and both candidates are very smart and very educated. But, you know, you actually touch on a key point in that debate, which is that Sarkozy did not go to the elite school that most of French administrators and top French politicians went to, the École nationale d’administration, or ENA as it’s called. And they form a very, very tight knit elite group at the top of French politics. Sarkozy did not go to the ENA, and he did not have advanced degrees, and he always felt a little bit inferior about his education. And at several points he said to Hollande, don’t teach me, don’t instruct me, don’t give me grades, you know, this kind of thing, in an effort to make Hollande look like an elite professorial type. It’s very hard to imagine in an American televised debate that people could go on so long. But it’s also very hard to imagine that you would have a president of the country calling his challenger, again and again, to his face, a liar, which is what Sarkozy was doing.

Werman: How much do French candidates ‘um’ in a debate, because France is notorious for that ‘uhh’, you know?

Dickey: Well, you know, what can I say? There isn’t a lot of ‘umming,’ there is a lot of puffing in French debates.

Werman: What do you mean?

Dickey: Well, it’s a great French national characteristic of irritation, where somebody says something to you and, I don’t know if you can hear it on the radio, but they sort of go ‘pah,’ they puff out.

Werman: Oh right, they puff out their cheeks.

Dickey: Exactly.

Werman: Like this question, exasperation again.

Dickey: Exactly. There’s a lot of that in French debates. In fact, I think one of the things they work on is to try and tone that down. French schools really do drive into them when they’re very young how to stand up and how to make a presentation. And if there’s any problem for an Anglo-Saxon listener it’s that they tend to be too Cartesian in their debates. Everything is putting forth an idea, and then three substantive points to support the idea. It’s an extremely mechanical way of making an argument, but it’s very hard for them to escape it. And so you see that all the time in public debates.

Werman: Now if you had to compare France and the United States, their debating formats, would you say the US is more easygoing than the French?

Dickey: No, actually I have the feeling when I watch American debates that they are more scripted, that all the great zinger lines that you get out of American debates are ones that have been plotted through endless practice sessions, where they sort of figure out when they’re going to say you’re no John Kennedy, or whatever the zinger would be in any of the presidential or vice-presidential debates. And I think that that exists in France, they certainly do rehearse, but ultimately, in a three-hour debate with no notes you can only remember so many talking points. You’ve got to get out there and put yourself on the line and really engage. And I think that’s the difference. I often feel, watching American debate, they’re really not talking to each other. They’re talking in parallel universes where each one has his own points that he wants to make and that’s really all that they’re there to do.

Werman: Christopher Dickey, Newsweek magazine’s Paris Bureau Chief. Thank you very much.

Dickey: Thank you, Marco. It was a pleasure.

Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.