I am delighted to hear polls indicating Kamala won tonight’s presidential debate by a substantial margin. But I was deeply disappointed at the quality of the debate.
These debates would be so much better if debaters were provided the questions a day in advance (or maybe more time than that) and were allowed to read their responses rather than speak from memory as required in the British Parliament, which is really silly. Their staff would prepare answers consistent with policy. The public would then know party policy,
Debaters would alternate as follows, answering the same written question. Start with a coin toss to see who goes first.
QUESTION 1: Coin Toss Winner reads statement for say 45 seconds. Coin Toss Loser then gets say 90 seconds, 45 to critique Winner;s statement, 45 to read their own statement,) Then Coin Toss Winner gets 45 seconds to critique Loser’s statement.
QUESTION 2: The roles are turned around. Loser goes first. Winner goes second, giving critique of Loser’s statement and giving their own statement. Loser then gets 45 seconds to critique Winner’s statement or defend their own statement.
REPEAT THE ABOVE ORDERING FOR SUBSEQUENT QUESTIONS.
I think this would produce a much more informative debate where viewers get to know party policy without a lot of fluff and bloviation. On the 09/10/24 debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump I heard more heat than light and a whole heap of platitudes repeated verbatim by KH.
I think it would persuade more voters to vote Democrat if they heard the true positions of both parties on important issues, concisely and accurately represented. The 09/10/24 debate did not succeed in doing this. Debates under these rules are tests of how quickly presidential candidates think on their feet. They fail to properly expose their policy positions.