Tech Could Rescue the Awful Democratic Debates

A week, like most of you, I saw hours of debates, and they appear to be getting worse over time. The effort made it seem like than to help people make a choice among the 24, CNN was trying to make drama.

We’ve got a bunch of technology — some new for decades — which help individuals to make and could make this process a lot more informative. Additionally, it might get folks excited about the election, so that they would vote.

I’ll provide some thoughts, as I did after the first round, how we can use technology to make the debates more purposeful and enhance the standard of our decisions (we actually have to improve the quality of our decisions ). I will close with my product of the week: an smart tablet from Lenovo that believes it is possibly and an Echo Show is a better value.

The Problem

The Democrats fielded a buttload. Can it be our job to make the decision (which it is), the debates so far have not helped much.

I mean, it does not matter what their candidate planned to do if the Democrats lose .

That should make it easy: Run on a platform of fixing what’s perceived as broken, eliminating Trump from office, rather than breaking. Instead, the candidates appear to be focused on issues that have believing that the president would be the better of two bad choices and will polarize the voters.

As an example, once more on healthcare (this was the problem with Obamacare), they’re focusing on getting the government to pay for it instead of focusing on the actual problem — the excessive expenses. We’re the source of government funding, so shifting the payee does not fix the problem, given that the money comes from us.

There’s also the matter of reparations, which would take money and give people who were not harmed directly it, and nobody is talking about numbers.

The tax per individual would be approximately $6.25 (assuming 80 million taxpayers) netting people who obtained the reparations around $6.25 each. That presumes distribution and the collection of the money would be free, and that it would not be.

Yet if this money, all $500 million, were to move toward fixing instruction or decreasing racial prejudice in the legal system or promoting more diversity in politics (note I am saying”or” not”and,” so it is not diluted so much it can not make a difference) the effect would be a lot more meaningful.

The candidates appear to have no concept that each of the”Day One” material is B.S. For the first several weeks they will be studying the job. Getting anything other than being sworn in, is unlikely, given that day goes.

In fact, folks do not care if something is done on Day 300 or Day One . Of what’s being promised much will not get done on the day, let alone at all. (The history of presidents keeping promises suggests most were simply blowing hot air throughout their attempts.)

Considering that the platforms, it seems to me like the Democrats want to lose but be that as it may, here is how we can apply technology to help improve the procedure.

It would not be hard for a news service to make a B.S. meter.

Additionally, it could gauge whether promises made were attainable by chance. As an example, a great deal of candidates made claims that Congress, that is dysfunctional and has become the bane of the two parties’ presidents, would need to enact — and probably wouldn’t.

The wonderful thing about a machine learning artificial intelligence or learning is that it would learn over time, and that would force the candidates to be realistic and honest. I don’t know about you, but I am a tad tired of politicians that seem to get because of their ability.

Virtual Debates

A couple of years ago IBM demonstrated its Watson AI debating with a debater. It performed well while the system dropped. Most interesting was that the system was possibly accurate and more entertaining than the individual.

You could find that method to emulate Trump and you might have a discussion between each of the president and the candidates.

This could help offset the perception issue with woman and minority candidates. Their heads have been locked in by voters that is an old man, and what a president should look like. This approach may help expand that perception to add a woman of colour that might be the natural transparency for President Trump, if done correctly. It would concentrate on performance however ensuring the outcome.

I am actually surprised this is not being done for debate prep — the training could be invaluable, even if it were not broadcast.

Completed Thoughts

One of the issues with the debate was that the arrangement was tight, and applicants were not able to finish a thought. Now the post-debate coverage could cope with this, but after five hours of this debate (with commercials), I am not sure how a lot of people would be hanging . With the inclusion of connections, people could go and read what the candidate was not permitted to finish saying.

Moreover, candidates could record complete answers after the fact, and similar to an elongated movie with additional footage, there might be a post-debate encounter that would give viewers more information about issues that concerned them. In that it had no connection to reality, the rule was crazy. An individual would require a ton of training to have the ability to articulate thoughts that are complex consistently.

An AI application could do it in real time, however, and when the AI could feed a screen on the podium, the offender subsequently could pass on studying the 15-second ability and render it to the AI, which might perform much better. This would be a excellent example of how to use AIs to assist people advance the technology, which can be in a place the U.S. currently dominates (China is coming on quickly though).

Instrument the Audience

Among the things I am surprised has not happened yet is the introduction of a program that would allow the audience to offer feedback on what they’re seeing. The polls on how people will vote are not reliable, given there’s simply too much time between now and the election. It would be possible to track perceptions changed and report that in time.

That way candidates could hone their messaging.

Aggregated Effect

Is provide voters and parse plenty of data and take. Additionally, it could adjust that for the probability of execution.

So, you’d find a standing not only of who had been listening , but also of that was likely to achieve more. As an example, both Sanders and Warren have comparable aggressive policy suggestions, but Warren is better incorporated into the celebration and are more likely to get done what she claims. That.

This could be useful. It might be a site that voters could check. It might go showing a running tab of the then-president lived up to promises.

Wrapping Up

It continues to amaze me that while we’re the world technology leader, we do not use technology to guarantee a government. Was a celebrity. He does not like to read and has created far more problems than he’s fixed. That means that the process is broken, and if the procedure isn’t fixed by us our future is anything but certain.

Technology is good at helping people make decisions that are tough . We will need to apply it to the process that is political, therefore we are able to select on what we would like to hear but make progress that is real.

About the author

Related

JOIN THE DISCUSSION