In the interest of informing the public, I hereby propose that we schedule a “debate” in which each major candidate (including the top third party candidates) will appear and be locked into sound proof booths, wherein they shall simultaneously take a final exam from a high school civics class. The questions, correct answers and each candidate’s answers, shall be displayed on a jumbotron for the live crowd, and on tv screens for the viewers at home.
No commentary, no explaining, no nothing. Just candidates answering basic civics questions and the world seeing what they know, or don’t know.
What would be the point? Anyone reasonably capable of studying would crush such a test. Anyone not reasonably capable of studying would decline to attend.
I think I would like to see all news organizations and campaigns select two or three mutually agreed upon fact checking organizations and have instant fact checking available somewhere or somehow. Or at least tell voters that after the debates there’s going to be a fact check review or something that’s incorporated into the debate. Maybe each candidate can get a fact score. We can no longer rely on moderators to do their jobs.
The candidates who flunked the test would just complain about the obvious political bias in the questions, and insist that the “Real America” works the way they described, and further lambast the fact that such political agendas have made it into our schools to indoctrinate our students into accepting lies. And their supporters would eat it right up.
The problem I see with it is, at least one candidate would answer the questions in a way that turned the whole thing into a campaign ad.
Here’s an example, borrowed from a Saturday Night Live sketch
Question: Who is on the $100 bill?
Answer:Thanks to the Republican obstructionism and benefits to corporations, most Americans have never even seen a $100 bill
Seems to me you should read the OP again. It says absolutely nothing about me writing any questions.
they shall simultaneously take a final exam from a high school civics class
I don’t teach civics. I don’t write exams. Hopefully the questions would have objectively correct answers, such as “Name the three branches of government”. Doesn’t matter if it’s graded by you, me, or a scanning machine. The point is to show whether the candidate has a basic knowledge of how our government works.
If a candidate were to respond to that question with something like “We’re going to make government great again. We’ll make it big, like my hands (and other parts, there’s absolutely no problem there) because people with noisy babies should go away am I right? God Bless Me…and…uh…yeah…that America thing…catchphrase!”, that candidate would get the question wrong. If a candidate displayed a similar level of “knowledge” throughout the test, whereas his opponent answered “Executive, Legislative, and Judicial” and similar correct responses, the public might draw reasonable inferences therefrom.
I like the idea of putting them in booths and only turning on their mikes when it is their turn to speak. No interruptions, just wait to make your point when it is your turn. Also allow each candidate to ask a question or two of the other.
I’ll ask you this again. Is there any candidate would do poorly on such an exam that would also agree to take it?
I’ll add in a few more points. Clinton was valedictorian in both high school and college and Stein has an MD. Both of them absolutely would destroy any high school level test. Gary Johnson is a reasonably intelligent guy who isn’t using marijuana these days. It would take him very little effort to refresh his knowledge of high school civics.
Trump is Trump. Why would he agree to participate in a test taking contest with a bunch of nerds?
On another note here’s what I’d like to see some time after the election. A Celebrity Jeopardy featuring private citizens Obama and Trump. This is also something Trump would never agree to, but I enjoy imagining the epic beatdown he would receive.
Yeah, you wouldn’t be writing the questions, but someone would be. And whoever it was, the failing candidate (and their supporters) would say that they got it wrong.
If anything, the OP’s proposal to test the candidate should be what qualifies someone to get on the ballot in the first place – a demonstration that they at least understand how government is supposed to work.
Unfortunately, the plan as stated won’t tell the voters anything at all about the candidates plans or policies if elected.
