Issue 693 Triple Blind Debate October 6, 2015

Inspired by my idea for a double blind debate in issue 686 and combining it with Glenn Beck's idea for an interview, I present to you a triple blind debate.  Let us begin.

A triple Blind debate:  First we must review the double blind debate.  The double blind debate for presidential candidates had the candidate's hidden and their voices changed so as to hide their identities while they answer questions.  No one would know who was who during the course of the debate to provide unbiased listening by the audience and limit the personal attacks by candidates as they would not know who they were talking to on stage, thus they can only react to what each candidate says.  The Triple Blind debate takes this a step further.  In this case, the candidates are completely sequestered first and asked questions.  All the questions are the exact same, but none of the other candidates will be able to hear the others answers.  This provides for answers that are less reactionary, and stick to the question at hand.  Then the candidates will be placed on stage to begin the debate.  However, they will not be asked questions.  Instead the footage of them answering each question (though their identities will be hidden in each video via voice changing, and blocking out their image) will be shown to them with them reacting to each and every video.  Which means they can potentially criticize themselves and their own answers.  But it allows for them to objectively react to each answer given as well.  At the end of each reaction by the candidates the audience can vote which person had the best answer to the initial question being asked in the videos (remember the candidates identities are hidden in the videos) and then the candidate who was voted best will be revealed.  This is meant to do two things.  Identify hypocrites and flip floppers amongst the candidates, and to provide an unbiased platform that eliminates race, color, sex, gender and other factors that cause bias in voters.  Basically, this debate type removes and destroys candidates who are not authentic and makes the audience rethink who they wish to vote for.

Conclusion:  So what do you think?  An objective debate as the candidates merely react to potentially their own answers, or agree with their fellow candidates answers.  Objectivity is hard to accomplish in a debate for President, but this helps to provide it in the same way as my double blind debate from issue 686.  We need to stop looking at labels and peoples exteriors, and instead focus on what these people really stand for.  That is what this debate type is designed to do.