[ichabod1]

Parliamentary style. One on one. If not that break them into smaller groups. Host alternative debates and only invite the ones that matter.

[Jim from C-Town]

Well, since they lack standing in the party as well as a broadcast or cable TV network. That might be kind of difficult.

[stanne]

Trim buys two hours of TV time Sells it to sponsors. Puts some logical informed experienced interviewed in there. Ask Ted Cruz for advice on debate format and we get the country back

Just take it

[Berlin_Freeper]

Musical chairs.

[4everontheRight]

Have someone from Breitbart or the Heritage Foundation (preferably Jim DeMint) as moderator and question writer. If NewsMax can't carry the debate, stream it on The Blaze.
Or lets have a conservative debate and a Republican Debate. I don't need to waste my time with the latter

[SunLakesJeff]

FWIW, I thought last night went pretty well. Eventually, debates will be streamed on demand at the polling place.

[Bratch]

The problem is with more than two people, they're not debates. They're glorified press conferences.

Unless candidates have unlimited time to state their case, you're going to wind up with focus-group approved sound bites* that (probably) have nothing to do with how the person running for office really feels.

* With the exception of The Donald, of course.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

I say, chess timers controlling microphones. Each candidate gets an equal allotment of time; whenever all microphones are off, time ticks down on all chess timers, but at a rate proportionate to how much time remains on each timer - so those who haven’t spoken yet have the most incentive to break silence.

NO moderator.

Coverage: whoever wants to broadcast. Plus online access, live and memorex.

Optional: each candidate is sponsored with $5 donations; initial microphone time allotted to each candidate according to number of individual donors who sponsor.

[Norm Lenhart]

Sure. I have one. Stop empowering GOPe altogether and let them die of natural causes - AKA No voters. They have no intention of listening and while it is thraputic to blow off some steam fantasizing about what the GOP should do, accept they will do the opposite of the right/smart/correct thing. That time is better used working to get a replacement party up, running and viable.

If the GOP wants to kill itself, let it. When a replacement forms/is formed, THEN we can deal with formats.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

How about all questions collected beforehand and read clearly and efficiently by a BBC news reader?

[DaveyB]

A different suggestion:

40 or so questions will be prepared and widely distributed to the candidates and published in the media a week ahead of the debates. A random drawing of two candidates are selected immediately followed by a random pick of one of the questions, maybe by using numbered ping pong balls. Then the 2 candidates are given 2 minutes each to provide their answer to the question. This is followed by a 30 second rebuttal of their opponent and then a 30 second close. Total time around six minutes and then to the next pair. At the next debate the same pair cannot face off again and neither can address the same question.

[RginTN]

I won’t even bother watching these debates. Its just leftists asking questions leftists want answers too.

[LS]

Good idea Jim, but haven’t you posted this, like, 50 times?

[verga]

Thank you for pinging me. I like your suggestions/plan.
I get to judge/ moderate debates (Lincoln/ Douglas) for our high school. Your format is very similar to what you use. Obviously ours is compressed due to time constraints and it works very well. The only reason the lam e stream media doesn't do it is that they are not he center of attention then.