Debates With A Purpose
Before some group starts planning new debates I propose we all demand that the debates be more interesting and that the format be less self serving. I don’t know about you, but 6 more debates with the same 10 questions for the 7th, 8th or more time cannot possibly be enlightening. The topics and agendas addressed in the initial debates are important and valuable, but a second high school debate and a second BizArts debate is not really necessary. I would also argue that it is unnecessary to again have community sponsored debates that, to varying degrees, use the debate to showcasing their organization by having detailed questions from the group’s members take up much of the time. These groups have justifiably had a chance to highlight what is important to themand some of the public. It is the communities turn and the debates should serve the public interest.
In my mind, the purpose of a debate is to illustrate the subtle or in some cases dramatic differences between candidates. With only two candidates now there should be more difficult and specific questions, requiring more specific answers and there should be direct interaction between the two candidates. A format that focuses on a single or similar topics rather than the scatter shot questions across the entire spectrum that we have seen so far would be more insightful into the candidates, their positions and their thought process. Maybe someone with political savvy and no direct interest in the ward such as Rich Miller or Laura Washington from the Sun-Times could moderate.
Another possibility would be to randomly involve the public without screening the questions or allowing a more partisan panel to make decisions. Maybe Ginderske and Adams could be part of a screening panel or be co-moderators.
In the end I would like the debates have a purpose and to bring out some voters that really have a decision to make. Most debates, in this ward or any other, turn out to be a pep rally for each of the candidate’s volunteers. If the audience was asked at any of the first round debates who was genuinely undecided I would guess that maybe 15% didn’t come with their decision made. What is the point if that is going to continue to be the trend.
