Presidential Contest

Last night was the first presidential debate of the season.  I did not watch it, nor will I likely see highlights of it beyond what skewering is done in next week's South Park.  I have come to the conclusion that the presidential contest system in America is totally out of touch with the realistic values needed in a leader as well as what Americans want to watch.  As such, here is my personal model for a proper contest.

1)  Debate

A president should be able to reason.  Today's debating is mostly rhetoric.  In the ancient days, the great ideological war was fought between logicians and rhetoricians.  The former believed in pursuing the ability to think, the latter the ability to win arguments.

My model for a presidential debate is to have a team of logicians running the debate on a 1 minute delay during which time they dissect the argument by propositional logic and use a buzzer and red flashing lights to denote when the speaker makes no sense.

2)  Strategy

A president must have the capacity for strategic thought.  In the Far East, strategic thought among leaders was exercised through playing Go.  There is a legend that chess was invented as a way for kings to do battle without anyone getting killed.

Since we are Americans, I suggest the quintessential American game:  Checkers.  Best two out of three.  Alternatively, bunkhouse chess with the vice-presidential candidates would be acceptable, since a president and vice president should be able to agree on strategy.

3)  Flyting

In the Norse tradition, violent altercations were known to end in flyting, where the two parties hurled insults at each other in front of an audience.  Ironically, violent altercations were also known to begin in this way.

While some might qualify today's debates as flyting, there is a conspicuous difference between veiled barbs about ethics, intelligence, or pastimes, and the ancient tradition of blatant insults regarding parentage, physical prowess, or sexual proclivities.  Nor are there hand gestures, these days, which were an integral part of Viking tradition.

I propose a three three minute rap battles.  A judge should be in place in order to call candidates out when they rehash material already used.  I would choose Eminem, since I loved 8 mile.  Candidates to be required to insult their opponents mother, wife, ride, and bling at least once, each.

4)  Physical fitness

Since a president represents our country in personal appearance - and since he determines the Presidential Physical Fitness standards - it behooves a presidential candidate to be fit.  We wonder why Russia is so much better regarded these days than they were previously and why our image is slipping, but if you take Mr. Putin and put him up against the last three or four of our presidents, there's no contest.  He hunts tigers and rides in fighters.  We have golfers.

I propose that we send each candidate to Camp Pendleton and let the R. Lee Ermey put them through the paces.  I mean, the winner is going to be commander-in-chief, so he should at least be able to make the age-adjusted physical fitness requirements of a US soldier.  Shoot, I'd let them off with the requirements of a US airman.

And, yes, I know Pendleton is Marines.  I just like the idea of turning the Gunny loose on politicians, and I don't think he'd slum it at Lackland.

The physical contest would culminate in an MMA cage brawl.  Alternatively, a WWE-hosted tag-team match with the vice-presidential candidates would be acceptable.  In the case of the latter, there must be at least one guy hit with folding chair and one guy thrown through folding table.

While some may question my criteria for determining fitness of a presidential candidate, I would also like to point out the pragmatic purpose.  The majority of Americans are bored with the current structured of campaigning.  If nothing else, my way is flippin' great TV.