Televised political debate has become an expected element in most political races for public office: as important as door-to-door campaigning, as crucial as purchased media time, as strategized an element as scheduling press conferences. In order to address candidates' opinions of local televised debates, who should participate in them, and what role debates play in a candidate's overall campaign strategy, a study interviewed local candidates for public office in New York State, as well as party chairpersons and campaign advisors (nine persons in all). Results of the interviews showed that (1) candidates regarded debates as strategy--how to show a favorable aspect of themselves or their record while trying to expose some negative aspect about their opponent; (2) candidates were not uniform in their opinions of what is a desirable debate format although the majority agreed that some time for head-to-head confrontation between candidates is reasonable; (3) televised debates were a very important part in solidifying in the voters' minds which candidate to vote for; (4) candidates were not opposed to debating under most circumstances and cited only extreme examples when asked when would they not debate; and (5) candidates generally liked debating because they wanted to prove to themselves that they were good debaters, it built their self-confidence as a candidate, and it could spark a trend in post-debate coverage that could last for weeks. (A list of the interviewed candidates is attached.) (MS)