Popularity contests, sound bite competitions, clout battles, smear campaigns - these are just a few phrases that describe presidential debates as we know it better than the title "Presidential Debate." 

​

The presidential debate, as we know it currently exists, does not serve the American people, rather, it divides us. It serves only the needs of the candidate on stage and has through time become just another means of campaign advertisement as opposed to a foundational element of truth-seeking. The American public is subject to a two-hour battle of he-said, she-said which inevitably goes nowhere and leaves both candidates having said nothing and leaves the American people devoid of anything that looks like a rational worldview or policy position. 

​

Depending on which party you ask, you will hear their reason why their candidate ran away with the debate. "They were quick, they were suave, they got under the other candidate's skin," etc. This line is often repeated by both sides of the aisle regardless of their performance because it has become so second nature to tolerate political evasion.

With the presidential debate becoming more and more intolerable in a perfect four-year cycle, we suggest a major change take place in the manner in which we construct these debates. No longer will the nation tune in for one two-hour movie of the top two prospective candidates. Instead, we will host six smaller, more concise debates. 

​

Each of these debates will be thirty minutes in length, they will cover one, potentially two topics if possible. This gives each candidate two minutes to make an opening statement, six two-minute segments to be used for answering questions and refuting their opponent's answers, and one minute for a closing statement.

​

Moderators in this debate will be charged with more responsibility during these events as their job will be to continually correct the candidate to stay on topic and not allow them to sway across party lines for the sake of a jab at their opponent. Too often have we seen a question asked about border policy and we get answers about the candidate's hopes and dreams. Questions about serious policy problems blown over in favor of correcting others about the size of their political rallies. 

​

Moderators have a serious hand in these new debates and thus they must be chosen very carefully. The open biases of news organizations make it difficult for the American public to trust the media and in turn, it makes it difficult to trust the conduction of American presidential debates when these media giants host them.

​

The miniature debates will cover topics such as foreign policy, the American economy, the American health system, border protection, trade negotiations, and one dedicated to general reasons why you should be president, allowing the candidates to have a bit of a freebie.

​

We believe this will alleviate the incessant blabber-mouthing that seems to radiate from every candidates' mouth come debate season and allow the American public to make educated decisions about our leaders. When we fail to make cohesive decisions and just go off the best sound bite we heard on Tiktok, it's not just a failure of our debate system - it's a failure of our republic for playing so loose with the debates that we have turned them into reality television.