How about some rules for debates

Post debate pain is sinking in.  The media insists that we have a winner and a loser.  But the measures are arbitrary and no one knows what scoring rules to use.   Actually, the real winner is likely to be the one that best matches your political perspective anyway.

So I propose the following rules and measurement tools.

1 - Timers are on but there is a filibuster twist.  Excluding the time the moderator(s) take to ask questions, candidates are suggested to take no more than 2 minutes to answer.  Regardless, they can see the timer and they can see the differential timer between the aggregates of the participants.  As the debate comes to a close - lets say one candidate used 8 minutes more time than the other - so when the debate reaches 8 minutes (or whatever that differential is) to go, the other candidate gets all that time with no rebuttal for the other one.  This will serve to keep answers short and sweet.  If the differential is less than 2 minutes - no award.

2 - Scoring:   For each question where the participants actually answer the question - 1 point.  Where they don't answer but just criticize the opponent, -1 point.
For each rebuttal where they address a specific accusation or counter point - 1 point.  Where a rebuttal is used to go off topic or criticize an opponent -1 point.  NOTE: If they satisfy the part where they earn the point and use remaining time to go off topic or criticize - then no points are deducted.

If they call an opponent a name or make a personal attack - 2 point deduction,  So if candidate A calls B an idiot - deduct 2.  If B suggests A is a bigot, racist, homophob or is fat - deduct 5 points. This is not that same as saying they are wrong on policy - but is a measure of civility in the debate.

If a candidate interrupts another, - 1 point deduction.  This can be somewhat arbitrary in application - but should be used only if the candidate being interrupted is stopped from speaking or forced to change the direction of reply.  So if one is speaking and the other mutters "wrong" - and the first continues to speak - this may be rude but is not a deduction under these rules. If they say "wrong" the the first stops and replys in any way - the other is charged 1 point.  The rude factor is addressed below.

Moderator bias adjustment.  Moderators always have a political perspective.  If a moderator displays bias by a) fact checking (even if correct)  b) asking questions in a attacking manner etc, then a 5 point bonus to the candidate they are against.  Call this the Candy Crowley or Lester Holt rule.

Finally, a demeanor bonus of 3 points is applied to each participant who can make it through the whole debate without eye-rolls, sighs, yawns, checking watches, or displayiIng other annoying non-verbals.  NOTE: This  is nearly impossible to achieve on either side.

There - take this scoring to your next debate and see who really wins.  The alternate version says to add 100 points at the end to the one you supported going in.