Let the People Speak

Abstract

This study argues that a “devolution” of the presidential town hall debate as public sphere has occurred, whereby every 4 years citizens’ freedom to participate in their debate—as they see fit—has been seriously restricted. The primary purpose of this study is to examine how well the town hall presidential debate, particularly in its current form, addresses issues of greatest concern to the American public. Specifically, to test how well the dialogue of a town hall debate matches the public’s campaign issue agenda, as well as examine possible changes over time, analysis compares the issues discussed in both the 2004 and 1992 town hall debates to the agenda of issues that citizens claimed were most important to them. Results suggest that as candidates have gained greater control over the town hall’s structure and resulting dialogue, the ability of this forum to reflect a citizen’s issue agenda has greatly diminished.