One of the problems we face with our current political system is how out-of-touch many of the politicians we elect are with the average American.
I think American politics is partly responsible for this; the way politicians have to run their campaigns, the types of stances they have to take to remain viable, the fear of getting caught saying something compromising, all probably contribute to this end result.
And also, public debates.
We all know how they typically go. Each candidate spends an inordinate amount of time on boiler-plate, rehearsed material, telling us about their stances which are probably already well-established, then telling us how they're better than the other guy. Very little information than what's already out there and commonly available. And if we're lucky, we might get one or two "Please proceed" moments worth talking about for more than a couple days afterwards.
The way they are currently formatted, I don't think the average voter really gets the information they need about the candidates they are evaluating from these orchestrated political debates.
And given the amount of influence they have over our political system, I think debates could be better utilized to highlight the qualities of these politicians that might actually make them good representatives/leaders, might allow them a chance to actually connect with the voters, and perhaps most importantly, might make them seem like someone actually worth voting for.
Political debates as we currently experience them in America do not give us voters or these candidates what we all really need: candidates talking to us, telling us who they really are, what they've been through, and how they really relate to the average American. Because in the end, this is what gets people out to vote, gets them energized to show their support, motivated to stand up for a candidate with whom they identify.
Sure, the voter can just as well get all of this by attending the rallies, the meet-and-greets, the fundraisers. But by virtue, the voters who do not go to any of these are the ones most likely to miss out on the candidates demonstrating these human qualities. Debates are their best opportunities, sometimes their only opportunities, to see candidates in this light. But they can't even get that the way debates typically go these days.
So in that spirit, I would like to see debates that ask the candidates, Republican Democrat or otherwise, questions like these:
When was the last time you had to take a drug test?
When was the last time someone denied you credit?
When was the last time you set foot in a welfare office? Or soup kitchen? Or homeless shelter?
When was the last time you had to visit a loved one in prison?
When was the last time a police officer or security guard singled you out for a frisking/search?
When was the last time you couldn't afford the gift your child wanted for Christmas?
When was the last time someone asked to see your birth certificate?
When was the last time you had to prioritize between sheltering, clothing, or keeping your family fed?
When was the last time you had to apply for a student loan for you or your child?
When was the last time someone pointed a gun in your face?
When was the last time you lost a significant portion of your possessions to theft, or fire, or a natural disaster?
When was the last time you took a bus?
---------------------
This is not about pointing out how many of our elected officials would answer "I have never done that" and vilifying them for it.
In all likelihood, one or two of these questions might catch any given candidate in an awkward position. But the same would likely go for the opponents as well.
Rather, it would give people in the audience a chance to get to know their candidates on a more personal, relate-able, downright human level. And it might serve as a reminder to the candidates of how far they have come, how much they have in common with their constituents, and how little separates them from one of us.
And it's possible that by answering one of these questions, the candidate has a chance to tell a story that the audience might not have already heard a thousand times, might show the audience a side of them that hasn't gotten through the rest of the campaign kabuki process, and show that they have actually lived a life that allows them to connect to people like us.
And as much as a candidate risks giving a bad answer to one of these questions, they stand to gain far more in voter support and emotional relate-ability on all of the other ones.
So this is how I think debates should go. Give each candidate two minutes to introduce themselves and get the rehearsed stuff out of the way. Then, pull five to ten questions like these out of a hat, maybe including questions straight from people in the audience, and give each candidate a couple minutes to give a genuine, unrehearsed answer.
A lot of people would likely object to a debate formatted like this, that breaks loads of customs and would actually require the candidates to think on their feet, something no political strategy seems to want these days. Hell, it doesn't even fit the definition of a true debate.
However, if there were ever a debate like this, I think we would finally have a debate worth having, and watching.
What other questions might be worth asking in a debate like this?