Bad political debate syestem

One of my favorite classes I took at Colorado State University was the political debate class. I have such fond memories of learning the proper way to debate how to do a Lincoln Douglas debate, and most of all to use my wits instead of my temper. I learned how to separate out my arguments from pointless slanders and irrelevant attacks against the opposing party. I worked hard on discovering the facts of my case and theirs. I came up with responses that were not only useful but backed up by credible sources of support. I remember staying up for a week searching books and professional articles or scholarly journals gathering all I could to prepare the best arguments I could. Not only did my rhetoric have to be sound but I had to be concise and to the point because of the time limits, my arguments were checked and anticipated by the other side to look for fallacies and most of all I would gain no points for using those fallacies such as attacking the other side’s character. I had to attack their arguments not them. I had to not only anticipate their arguments but their rebuttals. It was a game of wits and truth. But most of all it was a game of research and facts.
Still after coming out of this class I had one great question? Why on earth do our politicians not use this method of debate anymore? Our current political debate system is useless. It is more of a jabbing and mudslinging contest than it is a chance for our leaders to explore all views and offer the best evidence for a point of view. There is more immaturity in our current system than there has ever been before. I hate watching political debates. It is not a place where you can learn the facts anymore. It is more of a place where candidates can attack each other not their policies. When I watch those debates I feel always that the mediator has a political slant no matter which way it is. They ask questions about age, race, personal views and then maybe what they would do if they were president. The debates are no place anymore to learn about policy. If one candidate is proposing a new way of doing things up on the hill then I want to know every argument for it and against it. I want to hear evidence from both sides not opinion. I want to hear that their claims are backed up by evidence not what their cabinet says. There are no papers for the candidates to refer to no pre asked questions that are unbiased. Questions that are often asked are meant more as insults than viable questions. There is no group of judges to check the facts and sources of the candidate’s information. Often the modern debates turn in to a game of who can overtly insult the other party than who has the best argument. I want the arguments to be timed so that each member has equal time to not only make an argument, present a rebuttal but also to not bring in any new evidence when they are not supposed to. Also I wish that all the information that the candidate brings to the table can be checked and rechecked not only by the judges but by the public. We need to see the credible sources that these candidates use to support their arguments. I want to learn about more of the facts not their opinions in these extremely important matters. I want to know the downsides and every contingency accounted for when I hear these arguments being presented to the people that they are most going to affect.
Personally I am so tired of both sides of the debate saying that they won the debate when really all they did was personally attack the other side. If our politicians cannot debate with civility than how do they expect their followers to one trust their arguments, two know the truth, and three treat the other side with respect while disagreeing with them. They set such a bad example in Washington no wonder the public feels like that they are just choosing the lesser of two evils to be the leader of the country. By using Lincoln Douglas debates I feel that this country can not only learn about the political issues their candidate supports or is against but they can be reassured that their president no matter who ends up winning will have the common sense to research every issue that is laid before them. There are times when I have done a debate that due to my research and the other parties arguments my own views were changed or at least I gave much greater attention to their views than I would ever have before. So often we can be entrenched in our own views that no matter what the other side says we will not listen but at least this style of debate makes both sides look hard at the opposing view and their support for that view. I feel that this style of debate creates a better empathy than any other style if you know not only the arguments of the other side but the reasons why you are more able to understand your opposing side. That is what is so desperately needed in this country.
Perhaps my biggest argument for this type or style of debating is that our country needs to see that those who wish to lead are better than using cheap shots and fixed questions. They need to see that our candidates know how to address issues and not their personal ego. Our countrymen need to see democracy at its best and not its worst. When other countries look at our debates they see our people at our worst. These debates need to shine for our greatest glory and not be a demonstration of our pettiness. How often our own people vote knowing nothing based on the facts or watches our current debates to see who can get the best pot shot on the other side. Personally I hate our current system of debates. They focus so much on image or age not on wits and knowledge. Our candidates need to demonstrate that they know how to obtain facts and learn about all sides of an issue. They should not focus on well if I was in charge or if things were done differently than it would be better. They slander past administrations and bring very little numerical or physical evidence to the table to support what they are spewing out of their mouths.
I feel that our country does not look at the beauty of our debate system. It has been turned into something that is not so comely. If anything what I am driving at is that our country needs first and foremost examples of good character and hard work. Instead we get celebrities and heir and heiresses and nut cases that are running for and conducting our political system. Our debates could make a huge difference in people’s opinions and the way they vote. Our current system only seems to solidify our current biases and closed-minded, uniformed views about issues. Many Americans do not view our debates as an exchange of well constructed arguments that are for the informing of our people. No they view them more as a boxing match. Our candidates dodge blows and land verbal punches on one another instead of trying to convince the public that the side of their argument is for the best of those who they mean to lead. We need to show our children that our candidates are smart and well read not good at making jokes and insults. All we see is distrust between those who are debating. They demonstrate a lack of respect for one another. This is not the essence of democracy that our children are taught to revere and believe. This is just a demonstration of name calling, and pouting rather than seasoned professionals making real arguments that are well informed. We need to take our debate system and examine it with a cold eye. First do they provide us with real information or just fallacies and mudslinging? Two are we actually learning anything positive from these debates? Are our opinions being affected by these debates? Do these debates enhance our knowledge or create further frustration with our government and those who lead our party? These questions I feel are not being answered positively with our current political debating system. Change is needed for the government and for our citizens. We live in the information age. It is time we get that information from those who wish to lead us into a better future. I have railed enough on this system of debating. Perhaps our televised debating system should just disappear all together, but we know that that chance is slim. Still a change would be welcome by those who are looking for and expect more from their candidates than just a good show.