How Presidential Debates Became Unwatchable. A Nonpartisan Analysis
How Presidential Debates Became Unwatchable. A Nonpartisan Analysis
Off-topic, crude, loud. Debates should be the pinnacle of national dialogue but they've devolved into shouting matches. Here's why.
You're viewing a single thread.
Moderators are incompetent hacks with no political knowledge.
They should have a panel of the top general, most recent american economic Nobel laureate (or some equivalent), most recently retired surgeon general and attorneys general write the questions which are then presented by a moderator, then the author of each question responds to their answers and if required asks a single follow up question to each debator.
More importantly, if the candidates are non-responsive they should shut off their fucking microphones.
And when it isn't their turn shut off their mics. The only hot mics should be the moderators and the candidate being addressed by the moderators.
yes plz :)
I think this is a great point. All the moderators are media personalities without a background so they can't really claim expert knowledge on the issues. But the panel of experts I think is spot on to create this basis of expertise or fact. The single follow up used to be the norm. e.g. "candidates have 2 minute responses with a 30 second follow up" (strictly adhered to time)
also give them the authority to mute a candidate's mic for breaking rules, like talking over someone else when they don't have the floor. perhaps you can have a separate umpire type character. record what's going in the mic and release it 7 days later for transparency but don't let it get messy