But there should be a few new rules.
1) Any candidate who goes over his or her time, his or her microphone goes dead. Either that or Stephen Colbert’s pit band, Stay Human, plays over them.
2) Neither candidate will be allowed to address the other one. They will engage solely with the questioner. Any candidate who attempts this, their mike goes dead.
3) There will be no ad hominem attacks. The first time any candidate attempts an ad hominem attack, their mike goes dead automatically and they lose the rest of their speaking time for that question. A second ad hominem attack, and not only does the candidate lose their time when the mike goes dead, but their remaining time is awarded to their competitor. That will be the continuing policy for the rest of the debate.
4) Any candidate who speaks up and tries to interrupt their opponent or comment on their response, not only will their mike go dead, but they will lose the right to respond to the next question and their opponent will get their time added to his or her own.
I’d watch that debate.
PAD
• 
So, the format of the debate is that Donald will be present but won’t get to actually speak? Works for me.
Peter David: 3) There will be no ad hominem attacks.
.
Luigi Novi: Ah, you’re just saying that because you’re a liberal.
.
(Wink, wink.)
.
Okay, seriously, though: How would you distinguish between legitimate criticism of a candidate’s opponent and an ad hominem argument? It’s a nuance that’s easier to discern, I think, in the all-text medium of the Net, where you can take the time to examine the statement, but in the medium of live TV, how would a moderator do this, when such a distinction may in some cases only be borne out when you hear the entire statement?
.
Peter David: 4) Any candidate who speaks up and tries to interrupt their opponent or comment on their response, not only will their mike go dead…
.
Luigi Novi: Why not just keep the other candidate’s mic dead the entire time that the other candidate is talking?
Why not?
.
Proof of self control and discipline.
Maybe debates should be like the old infamous game show “Twenty-One”. The Candidates should be in booths and then when things become ad hominem attacks, you can turn the sound off.
…
Oh, wait… “Twenty-One” was rigged…never mind.
You beat me to it. Doesn’t matter if “Twenty-One” was rigged, the isolation booths would still be a good idea.
Or, they could borrow Miss Sweetie Poo from the Ignoble Prizes. She’s a little girl, who, when an acceptance speech goes on too long, comes up beside the podium and starts saying over and over “Please stop, I’m bored!”
That sounds like a good idea. Orrrr… We could get the Oscar orchestra to play the candidates off if they go on too long.
I was about to suggest isolation booths – in fact, i think i DID – last time.
{And my name on this post is a genuine typo i decided to let stand}
I’m pretty sure “Twenty-One” wasn’t the only quiz that used that or something similar.
Sorry, Mike (mike?) Didn’t mean to steal. I knew somehow my suggestion was familiar…
It’s an interesting idea, but then Trump would never get to speak.
Oh, wait…
Sounds almost like a Brazilian debate, which are rigid, boring and ridiculous.
Let’s starts with just #1 and #2. That will solve the majority of the problems without having to figure out how to handle #3 and will make #4 way more obvious and problematic when it happens (which should reduce it as well).
The Commission for Presidential Debates is a dual-party creation to make the debates as easy on the Big Two as possible, and to subvert the League of Women Voters, who were somewhat willing to recognize smaller parties as deserving of equal time. Can’t have that.)
(The FCC Equal Time Provision was specifically suspended, remember, so that the 1960 debates could be limited to Kennedy and Nixon only.)
Your possible rule changes, while good for us, are entirely against the spirit in which the Commission was created. So, no, your suggestions won’t be allowed, much less implemented.
Nice thought, though.
P. S.: *Please* fix it so pressing the Enter key gets a line space as well as carriage return.
Prettey please with sugar? What you see here is the result of pressing the Enter key nine times.
Hit “Enter”. Type a period. Hit “Enter”
.
Continue typing
.
Mike Weber:
.
Thank you.
.
I would just like to see a debate in my lifetime where the candidates actually answer the questions that they are asked rather than skirt around issues or ignore the question and instead use their time to talk about “their talking points.” If the Cubs can win the World Series in my lifetime than this too can be accomplished.
…also, it would be nice if moderators would ask both candidates tough questions instead of always lobbing them “softball” questions; or at least have moderators that don’t have any affiliation to either party/candidate or are employed by a news organization that has affiliation to either party/candidate.
Actually maybe just get rid of moderators altogether. Have the candidates ask each other questions, and the one who asks the question cannot interrupt the other candidate’s answer or they are docked 5 minutes of airtime which would be given to the other candidate to talk about whatever they want. It might keep the debates a little more honest… or at least as honest as politicians can get. 🙂
I know that this is late, and slightly off-topic. I no longer have a dog in the election, so I decided to focus on my Cubs instead. I think history will say I made the right choice.
.
From my p.o.v. they’re both unacceptable. It used to be we employed the phrase “lesser of two evils” as a metaphor to say that the candidate we backed was imperfect. This year that went to hëll, and we’re faced with a choice between two vile, corrupt examples of human filth.
.
I hate this election. It’s the first one that has ever cost me friends. I make the statement that backing Trump renders every conservative argument about the importance of character, the corruption of the Clinton’s (and Democrats as a whole), and the assertions of hating racism null and void. Some of my conservative friends have left me over my refusal to change my view, or at least my refusal to shut up about it.
.
Similarly, I lose progressive friend’s when I say concerns over Trump’s misogyny are rather ankle deep when it comes from someone backing the person in charge of destroying victims of her serial sex offender husband. I point out that that backing Hillary will make me question their motives for calling out any sort of sexual harassment of misconduct. What’s especially sad to me is that not one person has protested Bill is innocent.* One even went to so far as to try to say Hillary likely suffered from Stockholm Syndrome, and it wasn’t her fault that she was in charge of the “Bimbo Eruptions Squad.” (As if that made her more qualified to be President.)
.
Both sides of the political aisle this year are throwing away everything in which they believe in the pursuit of political power. It’s tragic.
.
.
.
*I’m sure Jerry could google-fu this, and show multiple articles casting doubt on every Clinton accuser. I’ve likely read those articles, and the articles in support of them as well. The point is that the majority of progressives I’ve spoken to believe he’s guilty, and ultimately don’t care.
Actually I could care less to try. I’m not a fan of either person running this year, and people will continue to believe whatever lie they want to believe no matter what facts are placed before them.
.
Although, I may now have to vote Hillary. I’ve been saying for years I’ll vote for the candidate who says they’ll get rid of Daylight savings. She just told someone who asked about it that she’d consider it.
.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/hillary-clinton-i-would-consider-ending-daylight-savings-time-201151539.html
You know, I can actually respect that, though (perhaps inevitably) I’m on the other side. It’s daylight standard that drives me insane. I like the extra hour of sunlight in the evening.
I’ve often joked that if I ever became president I’d stop “fall back”, and the day before the re-election tell people “Notice how much brighter your days are during my term before you cast your ballot.”
I work evenings and mids, so not the issue I have. I like night. I just hate getting adjusted to 9am being an hour earlier than my body says it is for the better part of three weeks.
Either way, it’s a one-issue vote I can respect. 🙂