The campaign season is upon us, and with it a seeming never-ending string of political debates and forums. At this stage of the game, such debates are often little more than “cattle calls,” with sometimes a half-dozen wannabes dotting the stage. When a finite amount of time is divided by a seemingly infinite number of candidates, it usually means that the candidates’ answers are circumscribed, little more than sound bytes. It isn’t very informational for the public and is more of an ego boost for the small-fry candidates than it is anything else.

I like fair play as much as anybody else, but I’m all in favor of limiting the number of candidates who are invited to take part in such events. It’s usually clear to all concerned who the front-runners are and who the dark horses are. They should get invited. So should any new candidates who have such deep pockets or such pre-existing name recognition as to make them potential players. But most debates and forums would be more effective at educating the public if they would set their bar higher for participation in such events.

What do you think?