The 'debates'

What do you think about the debates? I know, they haven't started yet, but let's talk about the debates.

From Webster - debate: a contention by words or arguments: as a: the formal discussion of a motion before a deliberative body according to the rules of parliamentary procedure b: a regulated discussion of a proposition between two matched sides

I'll start. So far, over the last several elections, the word 'debate' has apparently taken a new meaning. I though a debate was the interactive discussion of a subject by persons or groups that had differing views on that subject. Perhaps the 'interactive' aspect is what I am wrong about. But I would really like to see a debate.

What I don't want to see is what we have been subjected to for the last several elections - timed speeches, and the same speeches that have been used on the campaign trail ad nauseam. Moderator name a subject, 2 minute speech, 2 minute response, 1 minute rebuttal, 1 minute rebuttal, next subject. That's not a debate, it's a sound byte photo op.

Not only that, but I want the moderators to remind the participants what the question is/was when they stray off of the subject, which they always will. It's like each candidate has prepared 30 or so answers, and they will use these answers regardless of what the question is. With luck they may have an answer to the question/issue in their quiver, and they may be smart/quick enough to pick the answer they should use.

I guess I want a regulated discussion, and I guess I don't feel like that is what we are presented with.

What do you think?