"Debate"

In the first place, anybody who plans to watch the so-called debate tonight in order to decide who to vote for probably needs custodial care.

The impact of these events on the polls in the past has turned on ridiculous events. Nixon's sweaty upper lip, you forgot Poland, there you go again, where's the beef, I will not make a political issue out of my opponent's youth and inexperience, Al Gore looking at his watch . . . 

These are not debates in the sense of Oxford students arguing opposing sides of a question, or really any other sense. They're just performances in which reporters are looking for moment or a zinger or a presentation value that they can turn into a hook. Any candidate who earnestly tried to explain issues of public policy would be labeled a wonk and accused of talking down to people. Same if he used a three syllable word. Since Chris Wallace has promised not to do any fact checking you know what we're going to get instead. The real attraction of this is the same as the appeal of NASCAR: hoping for a crash.

The relationship between the ability to perform in these phony made-for-TV events, and the ability to function effectively as president of the United States, is the same as the relationship between being an NFL running back and solving differential equations. It's time to abolish this brainless ritual.