Riley May Have More to Lose in Debate than Typical Challenger, Says UA Political Expert

TUSCALOOSA, Ala. – While political incumbents generally have the most to lose in facing their opponent in a public debate, a University of Alabama political scientist who has written extensively on debates says the opposite may be true for the state’s two remaining gubernatorial candidates.

“Riley is ahead in the polls and has a generally positive public image,” says Dr. David Lanoue, professor and chair of the department of political science at UA. “But he’s still largely an unknown quantity, and when that’s the case, there’s always the danger that your opponent will move quickly to fill that void with negative information. That’s obviously what Siegelman tried to do Tuesday night, and it’s probably the reason he was so bold in challenging Riley to debate him.”

Gov. Don Siegelman and Bob Riley each won their respective primaries by a wide margin. Shortly after winners were declared, Siegelman issued a debate challenge to Riley who indicated he would accept.

“Generally we think of the challenger as having the most to gain by debating,” Lanoue said. “Incumbents, after all, already hold the office and possess the prestige that comes with it. By debating, the challenger gets to share in that prestige and appear, for at least one evening, as the incumbent’s equal. In this case, though, I’m not sure the conventional wisdom works quite so well.

“Siegelman figures that the more specific Riley is forced to get on the issues, the more his positives will go down. And obviously, Siegelman will hit him with a question like, ‘My plan for education is the lottery; what’s your plan?’ At that point, if Riley doesn’t have one, or if the one he has isn’t well received, that could be devastating.”

Lanoue receive his bachelor’s degree from the University of California, San Diego and his doctorate from the State University of New York at Stony Brook. He is the author of “From Camelot to the Teflon President” (Greenwood, 1988) and coauthor of “The Joint Press Conference: The History, Impact, and Prospects of American Presidential Debates” (Greenwood, 1991). His work has appeared widely in national political science journals. He joined UA in 2001.