In general I have usually been dissatisfied with televised debates between candidates, in particular at the Primary level. My dissatisfaction morphed into the epitome of disgust when Tim Russert took the opportunity to denigrate and trivialize Dennis Kucinich by using up some of his already minimal time to quiz him about UFOs. But it's not just that one instance; there are so many ways in which a thumb can be put on the scale in order to weight the discussion in favor of one candidate or the other by the moderators.
Here is a format that I would love to see utilized in at least one debate:
Think of the format used in the TV Talent show "The Voice" as a reference point. Have all the candidates come out at the same time and be introduced. Then put them in those big pod chairs with rock solid noise blocking headphones on and turn their back to the audience but still have a camera on them.
Then, ask each one of them THE SAME QUESTION with the same time to answer, say 3 minutes. When they are done, they have to be turned back around again and headphones turned back off.
With this format, every candidate is given exactly the same opportunity to answer the same question and will not be allowed to hear or see what another candidate says that is either popular or unpopular with the audience AND they will not be able to crib from one another or spend their time criticizing someone else's response, which is not the point. As voters, we all want to know what a specific candidate recommends for a specific problem and what's right about their opinion and not what's wrong about someone else's.
One rule in this part of the debate is that you can ONLY discuss your own positions. A candidate is not allowed to represent their interpretation of another candidate's position.
As part 2 of this format I would allow each candidate to be turned around one time each to pick a topic they want to discuss that has not yet been addressed and they could have 3 minutes to address it. Then I would let them select one of the other candidates to be presented with that same question or issue. The same rule about not presenting another candidate's view is in place for this portion of part 2 but the first candidate will be allowed to stay turned and tuned in and to ask one rebuttal or leading question based on the 2nd candidate's answer. They may choose to not use this option.
That last part isn't completely equitable because the second candidate didn't have an opportunity to hear the first candidate, but it's equal in the sense that they will have the same opportunity to have the same advantage themselves when it's their turn to initiate and engage. If everyone choose to engage the same candidate, i.e. the front-runner, I don't have any problem with that.
This would be very interesting because it would allow us to see where the candidates think their own strong points and also where they find fault or see shortcomings in their rivals positions or vulnerabilities that they would like to exploit.
I would LOVE to watch a debate with this format. I also think this format could be used by the Republicans to give a stage to ALL their candidates because they could simply schedule different times for what would essentially be the same debate, but with different participants. The only part that would be altered is the inability of the second tier to ask a question of the first tier, but they could still winnow out the second tier. Plus, based on this format, if a candidate performs well, they could find themselves moving up into the first bracket.
This format eliminates:
Thumbs on the scale by the moderators
Is completely fair and impartial
Would go a long way to placing the focus on issues
Would show in a concise way the real differences among the candidates
Would show who is prepared and unprepared
Would show who demonstrates herd thinking and who is original
What do you think of this idea? Do you have other ideas about how to improve debates?
(Note: This diary is re-published from earlier today. I put it up very briefly right in the beginning of this morning's spam attack and I took it down before any comments posted)