My GOP friends are whining about Sen. Tim Johnson and Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin not committing to debates this election season.

But before you GOPers come after me, I too have helped play the Debate Card for my candidate, 2006 Democratic Gubernatorial candidate Jack Billion. We complained that Gov. Mike Rounds didn't have enough debates.

Each sides does it and it comes up in nearly every election.

But does this "s/he won't debate" strategy ever work?

Without doing a ton of research, off the top of my head, I can't remember when it ever worked for any candidate at any level. The media loves to write about it but frankly, I don't think voters care.

And I think we should ask if debates are obsolete. Me, I like to watch them, have produced more than just a few for TV, and hell, even like to be in them. But you can find out a lot about the candidates from a multitude of sources without watching them debate. The Internet has exploded with not just places with biased information for and against candidates, but plenty of unbiased places with side-by-side candidate comparisons as well.

As my KELOLAND colleague and card carrying Republican Joel Rosenthal notes in a recent blog post:

There are timely and critical issues that deserve discussion as we look forward to a new Government next year – they deserve attention not how many debates, the format, the height of the podium, or other claptrap. South Dakota voters deserve better.

I don't think I can say it any better than Joel, the former Chair of the SD Republican Party. We both enjoy debates and he probably feels as I do that they are an important part of the algebra of democracy.

But no law says candidates have to debate. Most do, some don't. And frankly, does it really make a difference? I'm betting not.

Technorati Tags: debates, Tim Johnson, Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, 2008 election, Joel Rosenthal, Project Vote Smart, Boyda Bloc