Days later, political science professors are still talking about the vitriolic language and behavior between Republican nominee Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton from the first presidential debate Monday.
Allan Saxe, political science associate professor, said he wouldn’t be surprised if the next two debates are increasingly antagonistic.
“The next two encounters between Clinton and Trump in October should be more of the same, but believe Trump will be even more aggressive,” Saxe said in an email.
Political science chairwoman Rebecca Deen said the candidates interrupting and talking over each other took the fun out of watching the discussion.
Both Saxe and Deen said neither candidate won the debate. In a Twitter poll done by The Shorthorn, 73 percent of 146 total voters declared Clinton as the winner.
“I think neither converted anyone from the other side,” Deen said in an email.
Monday, Trump and Clinton debated foreign policy, race relations and economics. The candidates also discussed national security and their defensive plan of action.
Political science professor Mark Cichock said candidates tend to oversimplify solutions to defeating such organizations, like the Islamic State group (ISIS).
Drone strikes, or unarmed planes used to attack from afar, is the tactic the current administration has taken against ISIS, Cichock said. Though it is controversial, he said, it has been fairly successful.
“What the government has been doing is actually about as much as you could realistically expect, given the circumstances,” Cichock said.
Trump argued the Russian government might not be responsible for hacking into the Democratic National Committee emails in July. He said the perpetrators could be from any country, even from a 400-pound person.
Cichock said Trump’s claim is not only ambiguous, but also ridiculous. Cichock said Russian government executives likely had hired a company to hack into the email servers.
Cichock said United States officials need to trace the attacks to the source first. From there, U.S. entities can secure their systems again with internet shields and other precautions. Cichock suggested confronting the hackers diplomatically and telling them “appropriate responses” will be taken if the intrusion doesn’t stop.
This phrase likely means U.S. officials would hack into the system of the hackers, Cichock said. This back-and-forth activity could be bad for U.S. foreign relations, Cichock said.
“It’s just a dangerous game,” Cichock said. “Once it’s started, where does it end?”
If the first presidential debate was a boxing match, Saxe said Clinton would have won more points.
“Undecided voters who were thinking about maybe voting for [Clinton] now might have a reason to,” Deen said. “I don’t think that Trump supporters were turned off against him.”