Online polls show that voters are in favor of mandatory debates between candidates
Majority of persons who participated in a recent informal online poll say national debates should be made mandatory before every general election — a result that lays bare the growing appetite for greater accountability from those seeking to lead the country.
According to a poll conducted on the Pineapple Express 268 Facebook page, 88 percent of respondents strongly agreed that Antigua and Barbuda should institutionalise pre-election debates, with a further 5 percent simply agreeing. That means roughly 93 percent of participants came down in favour of the proposal. Only a small handful dissented — 3 percent were neutral, 3 percent disagreed, and a mere 1 percent strongly disagreed.
The findings reflect a frustration that has simmered for several election cycles — that voters are being asked to choose their leaders without ever seeing them tested side by side in a structured, public setting.
Not all voices were in agreement, however. A Commenter challenged the premise entirely, questioning both the value and the cost of staging such events. “Debates really mean nothing,” she wrote. “Voters know who they are voting for.” She went further to question the financial logic of the exercise. “The moderator collects a cheque for doing the job as host. The venue owner collects their cheque for the venue, and a caterer for the food — add in sound system and security. Is it necessary?” she asked.
She also drew on the American experience to illustrate her skepticism about what debates actually produce, arguing that election after election, the same questions are asked and nothing changes. For her, mandatory debates would amount to little more than an expensive platform for politicians to say what audiences want to hear, with no obligation to follow through once in office.
That tension between democratic idealism and political cynicism also surfaced in a second poll posted on the same page, which asked a question many Antiguan voters may have quietly wrestled with: what do you do on Election Day when you support one party but its candidate is clearly underperforming while the other side is delivering?
According to the Pineapple Express 268 poll, the answer for most people was neither loyalty nor pragmatism — it was abstention. A commanding 86 percent of respondents said they would simply not vote at all in that scenario. Only 8 percent said they would cross party lines and vote for the better-performing candidate, while 5 percent said they would base their vote on whichever party was performing better overall. A solitary 1 percent said they would vote for their party out of loyalty regardless.
The result is a striking indicator of where a significant portion of the electorate stands — unwilling to abandon their political identity, but equally unwilling to reward underperformance with their vote. In a country where constituency battles can be won or lost by handfuls of votes, widespread abstention of that kind could reshape electoral outcomes as dramatically as any swing in party support.
Taken together, both polls — while informal and drawn from a self-selecting online audience — reflect an electorate that is increasingly demanding more from its political class.
America stop us from getting visa to enter their country. Now, we want to have Election Debates like them. I don’t know of any other country that have Election Debates but America. If there is/are other countries, please let me know by replying to my comment.
Election Debates is a great idea; however, let us not follow suit other countries.