Introduction

The Democratic presidential debates have been under intense scrutiny, particularly regarding their structure and content. While there's a debate over whether the goal should be to repair and improve these debates or to control and predetermine their outcome, this article delves into the essence of each approach and discusses potential solutions from the perspective of debate coaches.

Repair and Improve

The Case for Repair: Debates are a platform for candidates to showcase their policy proposals, engage in intellectual discourse, and connect with the American electorate. However, current debates often get derailed by personal attacks and unworkable economic proposals, detracting from substantive policy discussions.

Addressing Personal Attacks: One of the key issues is the rampant personal attacks and 'catfighting' between candidates. These exchanges often overshadow substantive policy discussions and can alienate voters. Debate coaches can focus on teaching candidates to prioritize common goals and avoid inflammatory rhetoric. Emphasizing shared values and the importance of civil discourse can significantly improve the tone and quality of the debates.

Enhancing Knowledge and Accuracy: Another critical area for improvement is the accuracy of economic proposals. Many candidates propose policies that lack feasibility or fail to consider the complexities of implementation. Ensuring that candidates are well-prepared and that their proposals are grounded in realistic assessments would make the debates more informative and credible.

Predetermine Outcomes: The Alternate Approach

The Bias of the Democratic National Committee (DNC): Critics argue that debate content is heavily influenced by the Democratic National Committee. Given the DNC's history of favoring specific candidates, some debates may be skewed to showcase unusual or extreme positions, rather than fostering productive discussions.

Insider Perspectives: Insider knowledge suggests that the DNC may be debating internally about their preferred candidate. This internal debate can influence the content and tone of the public debates. For instance, before fully endorsing a candidate, the coverage tends to be more forgiving, whereas after endorsement, criticism and scrutiny become more prevalent.

Consequences of Preselection: If a candidate is predetermined, the public debates may become less about evaluating candidates and more about supporting or opposing the chosen nominee. This could result in an appearance of manipulated outcomes, which could undermine the legitimacy of the debates and the election process as a whole.

Strategies for Debate Coaches

Objective and Balanced Preparation: Debate coaches need to focus on preparing candidates to present their policies in a clear, concise, and accurate manner. This includes fact-checking, understanding the nuances of complex issues, and demonstrating the consistency of their proposals.

Strategic Communication: Candidates should be coached to communicate their positions in a way that resonates with the American people. This involves using relatable language, addressing voter concerns, and connecting their policy proposals to broader social and economic issues.

Ethical Conduct: Ensuring that candidates adhere to ethical standards, such as refraining from personal attacks and maintaining a respectful dialogue, is crucial. Ethical conduct not only improves the tone of the debates but also enhances the credibility and trustworthiness of the candidates.

Conclusion

The state of Democratic presidential debates reflects a critical choice: whether to strive for improvement and fairness or to engineer outcomes to support predetermined candidates. Debate coaches hold a unique position to influence the nature and quality of these debates. By focusing on educating candidates on ethical conduct, accurate policy positions, and strategic communication, debate coaches can help create debates that are both more meaningful and more representative of the American electorate's interests.