Shut out the empty heads

The candidates agree on a debate, set the format, name topics, and have a member of their party run the operation.  The format is then executed. You can always put it out on the internet if networks will not take it.

To simplify negotiations, each candidate names some number of topics, say, twelve.  All topics that both candidates list are included in the debate.  Each candidate may then reject topics that only the other candidate named, and give a reason.

The entire naming and rejecting process is public.  

More below the fold

Shut the empty heads out of the debate.  Let the candidate show what they are really made of.

Proposed format for two people:

Topics: Each candidate specifies a dozen topics that they are willing to say to the American people are among the most important facing America.  At least two topics shall speak not to substantive issues but to internal campaign issues that make someone the stronger candidate, e.g., volunteer operations, because, after all, someplace there was something about beating other parties, wasn't there?

The two lists are publicly revealed. All questions that are held in common on both lists are included in the debate. Candidates then take turns rejecting questions from the common pool of other questions, and giving a reason, until the list of questions is down to the time fixed for the debate.  "I think X is more important than Y, so I am dropping Y" is an excellent reason.  Yes, you may reject your own question and say yu like one of your opponent's.

The order of the questions is determined randomly.  There is a displayed
time clock.  Some modest number of seconds after the clock expires, the candidate's mike is turned down.

A format allowing serious thought:
Each candidate has a three minute begin and end statement.  The order is randomly chosen.  The same candidate opens the begin and the end.

For each question, each candidate, starting alternatively, gets a two minute statement on the same question. Each candidate then gets a two minute rebuttal, for eight minutes per question.  Each candidate also has a pair of 'more time' cards.  You spend a card whenever you want, and you get an extra minute, but for the entire debate you have two cards.  In particular, if your opponent is giving the final rebuttal, you can toss a card to speak again.  (We've used this in Libertarian Presidential debates, and it works well.)

Yes, you probably could replace the moderator with a properly programmed laptop.  

•  Lincoln/Douglas rules

  No moderator, no time limits, no amplification, no sponsors, just the Candidates slugging it out on the Courthouse steps.

  I'd challenged all the other 2006 Candidates for Wisconsin's Senate seat to a series under these rules, the eventual Republican nominee initially accepted, but then failed to return calls seeking specific dates.

  For TV, let any network that wants to pick it up bring their cameras, but give them no say in format.

  by ben masel on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 11:30:49 AM PDT