Preparing a president for a debate is no easy task, a sentiment echoed by many who have been part of such efforts. One of the most significant challenges is managing the number of participants in the preparation room. Everyone in the inner circle wants to contribute, often believing their input is crucial. However, this can lead to an overwhelming amount of conflicting advice, which is counterproductive. The recent debate preparation for Joe Biden illustrates this issue vividly.
As many observed, with an increased number of voices, the clarity of the message tends to diminish. Mark Herrmann, in his commentary published on Above the Law, suggests that Biden’s preparation team failed to narrow down the advice to a manageable and coherent strategy. Herrmann points out that Biden, who is often critiqued for lacking sharpness, perhaps needed a more streamlined and simplified approach.
The crux of Herrmann’s argument is that Biden needed to focus on appearing presidential rather than engaging in detailed rebuttals to Trump’s statements. Examples provided include scripted, forceful declarations on significant issues such as the Supreme Court’s stance on abortion and Trump’s actions (or lack thereof) during the January 6 Capitol attack. The strategy recommended was to avoid getting bogged down in specifics and instead emphasize strong, presidential responses that project confidence and capability.
Herrmann critiques the previous debate prep team for overestimating Biden’s ability to juggle multiple talking points. For future debates, the advice is clear: simplify, focus, and prioritize the essential over the tangential. The lesson here is not just for political campaigns but for any high-stakes professional preparation: sometimes, less is more.