Obama should have accepted McCain's request for town-hall debates

"It serves No Purpose for the Leading Candidate to enter Debates" The purpose of debating the issues is to establish truth, and helping to guide the country in regards to how to ameliorate its society. The fact that Obama may currently be the leading candidate is irrelevant. It does not change the fact that the government ought to do what is best for its country as a whole, of which can be deduced through debating means. For example, although being the leading candidate, it does not mean all of Obama's views on the issues are ideal or cannot be improved and refined. Debating can assist the bettering of ideas and issues for the government to implement. The president, of course, is an influential figure in such implementations. Thus, I have refuted my opponent's claim. I have argued that there is indeed purpose for candidates to engage in town-hall debates. "John McCain Would only make social insults towards obama and his Image. " This is not necessarily true. Well, first of all, community members may also be available for comment and stating their own views on particular issues in general. As well, people would be able to tell if McCain would only be making social insults, as my opponent claims. As well, in a debate, the goal is to establish truth. The candidates would better themselves through debate, therefore working on establishing that which is better for the country as a whole. "Moreso Its clear from past Debates during the primaries that nothing productive or in relation to the issues was established. " To the contrary, the primary debates allowed the public to assess the views and issues of the numerous candidates running. I agree that there was a great deal of fighting and attacking the other candidates, but the general points each candidate want to make would be available. As well, McCain has expressed interest in making these debates Lincoln-Douglas style debates. Thus, in essence, they would be the ones debating each other, with no moderator for the most part. This plan would allow for more time to elaborate on the important issues. However, even if little was established in previous primary debates during the season (of which I have already negated), how does this verify that nothing would be established through additional debates? The candidates in the primaries were in the same party, and thus their differences on the issues were minimal compared to between the democratic and republican primary winners. Much more argumentation and debate would logically be pursued, as can be induced, seeing as the candidates would agree much less readily on the issues most important. . http://en.wikipedia.org... "So becuase Obama would stand to gain nothing from it, It was in his best interest not to accept debates with McCain. " To combat this assertion made by my opponent, I say that it is most important for the public and society to gain from such debates. The issues referred to in presidential debates regard the society. Yet, however, both Obama and McCain could gain from these debates. This potential inevitably exists, and because of this occurrence, both candidates stand to gain from the debates. The purpose of a debate is to establish truth, and hopefully reach mutual agreement between involved members and parties. Overall, what is best for the society as a whole can be deduced much more readily via debate than through merely attacking each candidate and similar tactics used throughout the campaigning season. The ideal course of action for Obama would have been to accept McCain's request for town-hall debates. I await the following rounds.