The debate process needs to change

[mgcgulfcoast]

For one thing only 1 moderator should be in the room and that only as a timekeeper. This way there is no possibility of the moderators favoring 1 candidate over another. Let each candidate ask another candidate a question. Then you get a response and a rebuttal. Media moderators should not be seen as stars of the debate or making a name for themselves. Lets the candidates control the debate and the questions.

[Raven123]

1. Agree

1) No live audience
2) informed, articulate moderators who ask questions relevant to the issues
3) No debates until the year of the election. I once thought debates were helpful. However I believe people with little chance to win hope to catch fire during early debates. Hence we have 12 candidates on stage. That is not a debate. Make the candidates campaign, get on the ballot in EVERY state. I hope that would change the calculus for some.

[mgcgulfcoast]

4. I dont mind a live audience

but no tickets go to the DNC or state party or any media outlet. T he tickets would be equally distributed to each candidate.

[jalan48]

2. I feel like I'm watching Jeopardy the way the candidates are paraded out at the beginning.

[LonePirate]

3. The media should not be asking questions - voters should.

The debates should not be mechanisms to massage egos of members of the press or organization sponsoring or televising the debate. Questions may need to be vetted but they should all originate from
Voters.

[mgcgulfcoast]

5. I agree about the press

BUT "voters" can also be plants. Let the candidates be responsible for the questions asked.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

6. It sure does! Give the moderators a kill switch for those who run out the clock!

It's very unattractive to see them all shouting at once.

Nobody can hear anything!

It's also very counterproductive.

If the moderators can turn off the mike of the offending candidate, order would ensue and quickly.

Of course, you would need to warn the candidates that this could happen.

[mgcgulfcoast]

7. Good point, but they can only act as timekeeper only.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

8. And who set that rule? It could be changed.

[mgcgulfcoast]

10. I think the whole format needs to be changed

That would also ensure each candidate would get the same number of questions to ask.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

14. You could be right!

[yaesu]

9. I agree, it really serves no purpose as is, just a dog & pony show. nt

[NurseJackie]

11. The live audience is distracting. It's like watching Married with Children... woooooo! ohhhh!

The debates should be more dignified... and not like a scripted world-wrestling event.

I also think that ever candidate should be sitting in a chair... not slouching by leaning on the podium. And every candidate should be forced to sit on their hands. (Or maybe have hand straps attached to the chair... like they used to have on the $100,000 Pyramid game show.)

[mgcgulfcoast]

12. Perhaps the live audience should go

[NurseJackie]

13. Agreed.

Our candidates wouldn't get wrapped up in their reactions... wouldn't feed-off of the cheers and jeers... it would be nice to hear what the candidates are actually saying (rather than how the fans/foes are responding in real time). Distracting and un-dignified.

[David__77]

15. I would prefer no live audience.

I also think the questions should be delivered in a matter of fact way, and moderation should be on time and not content.

[mgcgulfcoast]

16. Very good.

[CrawlingChaos]

17. Couldn't agree more

My only consolation after watching the appalling spectacle we just witnessed is that it was SO bad I think it will ultimately backfire. Viewers couldn't possibly miss the incredible bias.

[mgcgulfcoast]

18. Yes

My proposal eliminates media bias completely