The debate moderators must take these things beyond sound bites and into substance.

I would suggest three debates. One on foreign affairs, one on economics, and one on quality of life.
I would not ask any questions about scandals. The campaigns can bring those up daily with the media.

Two minutes is a joke.
I would say, Candidate Smith, you have five minutes to describe your tax plan.
Candidate Jones, your microphone won't even be turned on.
At the five minute mark, I will turn off Smith's microphone, turn on Jone's microphone and ask her the same question.
After which each candidate gets two minutes to criticize the other's plan. 
Again, only one microphone will be turned on at a time.
Not as entertaining perhaps, but much more informative.
Of course, it's up to the American people. Will they watch Lincoln-Douglass, or do they want a cockfight?

Last edited by Goose (10/05/2016 4:09 pm)

Debates were once a good place to determine if a candidate was someone you wanted to vote for.

They seem nothing more than a circus now.

Goose wrote:

I did not watch the debate.
The morning after, the talking heads said that Pence won "stylistically".
But, the fact checkers are destroying him, as Tennyson noted,
So, is style a synonym for lying easily?

That's a great point. These debates are the epitome of "style over substance".

It doesn't matter what you say, all that matters is how you say it. That's how you wind up with a serial liar like Donald Trump slithering through the Republican primary and keeping the general election uncomfortably close. People are bashing the debates for having fact-checkers, they're bashing the media for replaying clips of candidates saying contradictory things.

I'm not entirely surprised that we are where we are. Trump is running a campaign based on a return to the "good old days", and that strikes a chord with the majority of older white males. They are out of their comfort zone - our democratic society has dragged them, kicking and screaming, into a world where their most cherished values are deemed antiquated and in some cases unacceptable. For a long time I think most of them were hesitant to speak their minds because they would be openly criticized, called jerks, isolated, etc. But then Barack Obama was elected President and we started to see individuals in the public realm - politicians, celebrities, religious figures, etc. - say the things that these older white males had been thinking the whole time. And it empowered them. The Tea Party empowered them. And I think that groundswell of support has empowered Trump...he saw an opportunity to become popular, to be the standard bearer for jerks everywhere. Getting back to the original point, there is very little substance. It's all about style. Trump is the fierce and unwavering advocate for getting the majority of older white males back to their comfort zone. Sadly, for some that means putting blacks, women, immigrants, the intellectually disabled, etc. back in a place of subservience.

Excellent post, Doug.
This is definitely an election more about white anxiety over culture and class grievance or change than it is about traditional liberal/conservative governing philosophy.