Re: “US debates, primaries worth emulating”, Editorial, September 29.
Indeed, our latest constitution should have provided for debates between the two leading candidates for prime minister. The benefits are obvious. Not only would the candidates be forced to disclose their strategies in governing us for the next four years, they would also reveal their true personalities and intelligence – literally having to bare their souls.
The recent Trump-Clinton duel was the most bizarre political confrontation I have ever witnessed, but it was immensely enjoyable to watch Trump’s frailties unfold. According to one media outlet, Trump interrupted Clinton’s speech 50 times. It wouldn’t say much for America’s education system if Trump were eventually elected.
Imagine if we had had this type of debate, televised nationally, in the last election between Yingluck and Abhisit. I venture to guess that we would not now be bearing the huge financial loss from the rice-pledging scheme or suffering through this period of instability.