Bipartisan National Citizens Panel Uses The Dignity Index To Score the Presidential Debate

Panel agrees on dignity across partisan lines — validating The Dignity Index as a tool acceptable to the right and the left

SALT LAKE CITY, Sept. 13, 2024 /PRNewswire/ — UNITE, the non-profit founded in 2018 by Tim Shriver to ease the country’s political divisions, today released its scores for this week’s Presidential debate using The Dignity Index. Language from the two candidates was scored for dignity or contempt by UNITE’s National Citizens Panel – an 80-member bi-partisan panel constituting a broadly representative sample of Americans.

“Our nation’s divisions are not caused by our disagreements,” said Tim Shriver, co-creator of the Dignity Index. “They’re caused by treating others with contempt when we disagree. Scoring how we talk to each other can show us how we’re contributing to our divisions and how we can start to change.” 

The National Citizens Panel was formed in January with the guidance of research groups More in Common and ROI Rocket. The panel is using the Dignity Index to score the dignity or contempt in selected passages of political speech during the 2024 campaign. Scores will be released weekly through election day.       

Training

The panelists were given three 45-minute training sessions in the Dignity Index scoring system in February and since then have been spending 30 minutes a week scoring six to eight passages taken from political communications. The panel is part of ongoing research to see whether people with opposing viewpoints on politics and culture can agree on a definition of dignity, on the value of dignity and on whether dignity or contempt is present in the language they score.

“It’s easy to think that we need to have dozens of values in common if we’re going to have a society that works,” said Tom Rosshirt, co-creator of the Index. “But maybe we need only one shared value to ease our divisions and solve our problems — the value that everyone should be treated with dignity.” 

Findings from a More in Common survey done this summer indicate that panelists learn easily to see contempt in political speech, that many learn to see their own contempt and its divisive effects, and that panelists of opposing political views can agree on the presence of dignity or contempt in a speech, regardless of who is speaking or what they are saying.

“We might assume that people with strong political views would always see dignity in their own side and contempt in the other side,” said Rosshirt. “But that’s not true. The panelists show broad cross-partisan agreement on whether a passage expresses dignity or contempt – which means they can see contempt in a view they embrace and dignity in a view they oppose.”

Debate Scores

Panelists score by matching language from the speech passage with descriptions in the Dignity Index scoring guide, which is available here. 

1. Kamala Harris on Donald Trump’s International Legacy: “I have traveled the world as Vice President of the United States, and world leaders are laughing at Donald Trump. I have talked with military leaders, some of whom worked with you, and they say you’re a disgrace.”

96% of panelists agree that this was contemptThe most frequently chosen score was a THREEThe reasons given the most were “makes a personal attack on the other, targeting performance, competence, appearance, background, character or morals.” and “disdains the other side”93% of panelists scored within +1 or -1 the score of THREEThe Conservative average score was 2.810, and Liberal average score was 3.125

2. Donald Trump on the Biden Administration’s International Legacy: “We’re a failing nation. We’re a nation that’s in serious decline. We’re being laughed at all over the world. All over the world, they laugh, I know the leaders very well. They’re coming to see me. They call me. We’re laughed at all over the world.”

83% of panelists agree that this was contemptThe most frequently chosen score was a THREEThe reasons given the most were “they look down on us and mock our values.” and “makes a personal attack on the other, targeting performance, competence, appearance, background, character or morals.”82% of panelists scored within +1 or -1 the score of THREEThe Conservative average score was 3.476, and the Liberal average score was 3.083

3. Kamala Harris, in response to the Israel-Hamas War: “What we know is that this war must end. It must end immediately, and the way it will end is we need a cease-fire deal and we need the hostages out. And so we will continue to work around the clock on that. Work around the clock also understanding that we must chart a course for a two-state solution. And in that solution, there must be security for the Israeli people and Israel and in equal measure for the Palestinians.”

99% of panelists agree that this was dignityThe most frequently chosen score was a FIVEThe reasons given the most were “speaks openly, explaining their views, but never with contempt.” and “I share my views with no contempt, so they’re easier for others to hear.”82% of panelists scored within +1 or -1 the score of FIVEThe Conservative average score was 5.619, and the Liberal average score was 6.120

4. Donald Trump in response to Kamala’s Trump Sales Tax Claim: “First of all, I have no sales tax. That’s an incorrect statement.”

58% of panelists agreed that this was dignityThe most frequently chosen score was a FIVEThe reasons given the most were “challenges the other side on facts, actions, decisions, and outcomes, never with insults or negative labels.” and “speaks openly, explaining their views, but never with contempt.”42% of panelists thought this was contemptThe Conservative average score was 4.524, and the Liberal average score was 4.520NOTE: It’s unusual for panelists to differ widely on the dignity vs. contempt of a passage. It occurred in this case because it was a borderline call with differing viewpoints about whether the former President’s words of disagreement expressed contempt. The nearly matching conservative and liberal averages shows the difference was not a partisan split.

5. Kamala Harris on Trump’s negotiation: “Donald Trump when he was president negotiated one of the weakest deals you can imagine. He calls himself a dealmaker. Even his national security adviser said it was a weak, terrible deal.”

88% of panelists agree this was contemptThe most frequently chosen score was a THREEThe reason most given was “makes a personal attack on the other, targeting performance, competence, appearance, background, character or morals.”87% of panelists scored it within +1 or -1 of a THREEThe Conservative average score was a 3.333, and the Liberal average score was 3.583

6. Donald Trump on the current administration’s immigration policy: “Well, bad immigration is the worst thing that can happen to our economy. They have and she has destroyed our country with policy that’s insane. Almost policy that you’d say they have to hate our country.”

97% of panelists agree this was contemptThe most frequently chosen score was a TWOThe reasons most given were “Those people are evil. They’re going to ruin our country if we let them. It’s us or them.” and “believes the other side is an existential threat.”88% of panelists scored within +1 or -1 the score of a TWOThe Conservative average score was 2.714, and the Liberal average score was 2.458

7. Kamala Harris on Trump’s relationship with Putin: “And why don’t you tell the 800,000 Polish Americans right here in Pennsylvania how quickly you would give up for the sake of favor and what you think is a friendship with what is known to be a dictator who would eat you for lunch.”

97% of panelists agree this was contemptThe most frequently chosen score was a THREEThe reasons most given were “makes a personal attack on the other, targeting performance, competence, appearance, background, character or morals.” and “disdains the other side”93% of panelists scored within +1 or -1 the score of THREEThe Conservative average score was 2.714, and the Liberal average score was 3.125

8. Donald Trump on Kamala Harris: “She’s destroying this country. And if she becomes President, this country doesn’t have a chance of success. Not only success. We’ll end up being Venezuela on steroids.”

97% of the panelists agree this was contemptThe most frequently chosen score was a TWOThe reasons most given were “Those people are evil. They’re going to ruin our country if we let them. It’s us or them.” and “believes the other side is an existential threat.”96% of panelists scored within +1 or -1 the score of a TWOThe Conservative average score was 2.333, and the Liberal average score was 2.042

The panelists are offered a chance to make comments on different passages and their scores. Here are three notable comments: 

A panelist on the right wrote: “The entire debate was long on insults and short on solutions. I think our politics as a whole reside in three territories because we rarely hear about how one candidate is better, the argument is always how the other candidate is worse…It is no longer a dignified discussion of ideas, it is each candidate constantly looking for an opportunity to use the canned one-liner they rehearsed for six hours in front of a mirror.”

A panelist in the middle wrote: There is no such thing as dignity at all with these candidates. As an American, I am embarrassed how the rest of the world sees us.

A panelist on the left wrote (in response to Harris’s claim that world leaders were laughing at Trump): “True or not, this is not the way to move forward in this country.”

For more information about The Dignity Index and to access the full analysis of the debate, please visit www.dignity.us.

View original content:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/bipartisan-national-citizens-panel-uses-the-dignity-index-to-score-the-presidential-debate-302247971.html

SOURCE Project UNITE, Inc.