EPIPHANY OF THE DAY

 DEBATES

There are things about the telecasting, nationally, of so-called presidential "debates" that bother me. Yes, first and foremost is the fact that they aren't debates at all. They don't even resemble the classic confrontations of Lincoln and Douglas. In fact, it is hard to say of what they actually do remind one.

Best analogy I can think of is a verbal confrontation between Hulk Hogan and Jake "the Snake" Roberts.

Then there is the fact that some people simply appear more likeable on TV. Back during the start of modern debates, people hearing "Kennedy v. Nixon" on the radio tended to grant Richard Nixon the nod of success. Those watching on TV picked the young and vibrant John Kennedy over the sweating and unshaven Nixon.

Then there is the lack of discipline imposed by the producers. This is, after all TV. These events are not designed for information, much less for decision-making. They are designed for ratings-making. Producers jump for joy when an unmanageable bully like Donald Trump treads all over the time allotted to a policy-wonk, and female, like Hillary Clinton. "Eye-God, he showed her" or something like that dominated the headlines.

Then there is the fact that the aftermath, the denouement, the score in effect, is managed by the pundits. Say two debaters perform miserably. Reports of that won't sell. Pick one as "the loser" and let the public decide through some form of mental subtraction, that the other was "the winner."

Above all, though, is the issue of expectations. Take the Bush Jr. v Gore debates. All the former had to do was not say "I haven't a clue" and remember who the president of Mexico was, and he achieved Mt. Everest-sized accolades. Oh, and poor Al Gore sniffed more than once. When one has the Supreme Court of the United States in his corner, the achievement of expectations falls in importance.

Now we have an upcoming debate in which the following standards exist. Achieving them all will gain a resounding worldwide claim of victory for one of the contestants:

CONTESTANT ONE:

Outline a clear plan for world peace. Outline a clear plan for establishing an economic system that is equally fair and equitable for all, Outline a clear plan for solutions to nagging problems such as supply-chain delays. Solve a major immigrant problem caused in great part by Americans' penchant for illegal drugs from South America. Reduce grocery prices while on stage. Appear like the kindly neighbor down the street. Convince all under 40 years of age that this is the contestant with whom one would most like to share a beer or two.

CONTESTANT TWO:

Make it to the podium without wetting himself on national TV.

One suspects that the pundits have already written their reviews.