For some reason this is a preferred mode of political dialogue.
The reason is pretty obvious. The goal of the participants in a political dialogue is to become more liked and to make competitors less liked. It has nothing to do with "raising the level of discourse and understanding on that topic" -- that's just NOT the point of the exercise.
It probably continues because of the expectation of debates - no one would introduce them if they didn't already exist today.
See this Newsroom clip.
Basically, their news network is trying to change the way political debates work by having the moderator force the candidates to answer the questions that are asked of them, not interrupt each other, justify arguments that are based on obvious falsehoods etc.
How big of a positive impact do you guys think that this would have on society?
My initial thoughts are that it would be huge. It would lead to better politicians, which would be a high level of action. The positive effects would trickle down into many aspects of our society.
The question then becomes, "can we make this happen?". I don't see a way right now, but the idea has enough upside to me that I keep it in the back of my mind in case I come up with a plausible way of implementing the change.
Thoughts?