I can see that one of the challenges for future debates is motivating the candidates to stick to the subject of the question.

So, how to do this when debates are just evolving into platforms for candidates to deliver carefully-prepared talking points and zingers, regardless of the questions asked?

Easy. Format the debate like a game show. With lights, bells, and whistles. And zippy theme music. Complete with a game show host and a panel of judges. And here’s how it would work.

The candidate is asked a question. Maybe we could even get the candidate to spin a wheel for it or something. The candidate answers the question. The panel of judges awards the candidate a number of points based on how well the question was answered. If a candidate talks about ISIS in response to a question having nothing to do with ISIS (or about terrorism, or even about foreign policy), the candidate would score zero. If the candidate is asked about ISIS and responds by talking about ISIS, points would be awarded based on how well the candidate stuck to the subject (not necessarily on how workable the proposed plan was — that would be for the voter to decide).

The panel of judges would be made up of journalists — neutral if possible, but if not possible, balanced with an equal number from the right and the left.

And perhaps the winner (candidate with the most points) at the end of the regular rounds of play would get to play a “bonus round”, where the candidate would get 10 minutes to talk about anything he or she wanted. Getting 10 free minutes of air time in front of millions of potential voters would be worth the candidate’s while to try to win this. Plus the audience would be a big one. People love a good game show, and this would be no more of a joke than debates are now.