This book offers an answer to the question, "Why are Presidential debates so bad?" The answer could be that the Commission on Presidential Debates ruined them, or it could be that we don't really know how to watch or judge a debate. This book offers both an explanation of how we historically ended up with these terrible debates and how to make lemonade out of them. The book provides a method to watching this madness without going or getting mad yourself, and what perhaps we can say to others about these debates. It concludes with speculation beyond 2024 now that the Commission on Presidential Debates appears to be irrelevant. What types of debate can we expect, and what should we demand?
1. Presidential Debating, our Frustrating Democratic Tradition.- 2. The Rise of the Presidential Debates, or How did we get Here?.- 3. Making Commission Debates Valuable, or How to Clean a Rhetorical Mess.- 4. Framework, or Setting The Scene.- 5. Principles, or What Do You Stand For?.- 6. Vision, or What s the Plan?.- 7. Action, or How Candidates Share their Resumes.- 8. Presidential Debating, the Conclusion.
Stephen M. Llano (B.A., Texas A&M; M.A., Syracuse University; Ph.D., University of Pittsburgh) has taught debate at the middle school, high school, and university level. He has lectured on debate extensively in North America, Europe, and Asia in countries such as Japan, Slovenia, and Ukraine. He regularly publishes his work in journals such as Argumentation and Advocacy. He is the founding editor of a the journal Studies in Debate and Oratory, and is host of the debating podcast In the Bin.
