After the last presidential debate, many were left feeling as though there were two losers - and one of them was the American people. What was the thing that beat us? The format of the debate.

The debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump was full of interruptions, disrespectful behavior, lies, factual errors and misinformation. Although the media does fact- check the debate afterward, it isn't fair that people should have to spend extra free time after the 90 minutes they spent watching the debate sorting out all the garbage in an attempt to make an informed decision. In fact, most people don't have the time to do so. This leads to misinformed voters who often vote against their best interests. It is the news media's job to hold candidates accountable and keep them honest. Unfortunately, in today's world that doesn't always happen. On that note, here are some ideas on how to improve presidential debates so that Americans can have all the information they need in order to make better decisions.

1. Interruptions.

Although people may differ politically, one thing we can agree on for the most part is that it is extremely annoying to hear a candidate interrupting their opponent when it is not their turn. Not only does it come off as rude and condescending, but it also leads to the audience being unable to hear either candidate's message. Therefore, I think that whenever it is not a candidate's turn to speak, their mic should be muted.

2. Fact Checking.

Sometimes politicians throw around numbers to prove a point regardless of reality. In order to keep candidates straight, there should be a team of independent fact checkers sitting next to the moderator fact checking the debate as it progresses. If a candidate makes a false statement, the fact checker should be able to display the evidence which disproves the statement on a screen behind the podiums. After a few questions, there should be a break where all attention is turned to the screen and the audience can take a few minutes to see the actual facts and lies.

3. Not Answering the Question.

We see this happen so many times. Politicians talk in circles when asked very straightforward questions, and the moderator very rarely points it out. For example, at the vice presidential debate last week, this was an exchange that occurred between the moderator and Mr. Pence.

QUIJANO: So, Governor, how would these millions of undocumented immigrants leave? Would they be forcibly removed?

PENCE: Well, I think Donald Trump laid out a series of priorities that doesn't ends with border security. It begins with border security. And after we secure the border, not only build a wall, but beneath the ground and in the air, we do internal enforcement.

But he said the focus has to be on criminal aliens. We just -- we just had a conversation about law enforcement. We just had a conversation about the -- the violence that's besetting our cities. The reality is that there's heartbreak and tragedy that has struck American families because people that came into this country illegally are now involved in criminal enterprise and activity. And we don't have the resources or the will to deport them systemically.

Donald Trump has said we're going to move those people out, people who've overstayed their visas. We're going to enforce the law of this country. We're going to strengthen Immigrations and Customs Enforcements with more resources and more personnel to be able to do that. And then Donald Trump has made it clear, once we've done all of those things, that we're going to reform the immigration system that we have...

After Mr. Pence gave this answer, the moderator should ask something like, "So is that a "yes" for forcibly removing illegal immigrants who have committed crimes?" in order to really cut through the verbiage and get to the point.

I believe these changes really will make the debate processes much fairer and informative for everyone. There are several petitions requesting that some of these changes be made on Change.org which you are free to sign. On that note, let's try and cut through the nonsense at tomorrow's second debate in the meantime.