The battle for the ultimate championship in American politics is drawing near--the race for the White House. While campaigning has been never-ending for these candidates over the past year-and-a-half, two interesting opponents will take to the stage in the upcoming presidential debates. Arguably, one could propose that the unpredictability of what will come out of either opponent's mouth could be just as entertaining as any football game that most would rather watch than the debates. However, it has come to my attention that the presidential debates are losing their legitimacy as a means of properly evaluating our candidate's worthiness to assume the role of the POTUS. Though they might serve as great entertainment, I can only hope that voters are smart enough to understand the faults in our debates that include but are not limited to the following:

1. Perceptions of the candidates have already been molded through our social-media dominated world.

When you think about the size of the communications staff that each candidate has, you can bet your college tuition and more that, that area alone in the campaign is extremely costly and highly employed. These people work on the daily to suppress rumors, control information release, and do everything in their power to reflect their supported candidate in the best light possible. The portrayal of candidates in this technological age has become largely based off of what we see on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram. One right or wrong move from any candidate goes viral in an instant. Photos, videos and posts, whether manipulated or not, have all allowed voters to develop an inaccurate preconception of candidates so that the debates have higher stakes involved under all of the wrong conditions.

2. We as a society focus on all of the wrong things.

Going off of how we judge our political opponents vying for the ultimate prize of the White House, this leads us to the idea that we as a society are focusing on all of the wrong things in our candidates. Dating back to Richard Nixon vs. JFK debate which was the first to be televised in history, it has become very obvious that our presidential debates have lost meaningful substance. Appearance is the first thing we judge, which discourages any focus on what is being said and more emphasis on facial expressions, clothing, body language and aesthetics. One can argue that it was the televised debates that could very easily have cost Richard Nixon the presidency that election year. This puts into question every debate after that, especially considering the way we have transformed it into a spectacle and not a serious forum for determining our future leaders. No longer do people talk about what was discussed, but more-so the actions observed that spoke far louder than any words could have.

3. Nothing the candidates say can be trusted.

An explanation justifying focusing on the "wrong" things I discussed previously could very easily be that listening to what the candidates say is a waste of time because of the extreme level of distrust Americans have expressed about them. Why listen to empty words and promises that will not be converted into anything concrete? Sadly, this is not necessarily a debate issue, but an issue with American politics as a whole. However, it does assist in exemplifying the illegitimacy and pointlessness of our modern day presidential debates.

4. The absence of a third party in this specific election's debates has created nationwide disdain.

Whether you are a Gary Johnson advocate or not, you cannot deny the attention that his party has gained in this past election. To a certain extent, not allowing a third party candidate such as Johnson to debate simply exacerbates our problem of polarized politics in America in addition to taking away a potentially valuable asset from the presidential debates. How are we to maintain our free-and-fair election values when there are have been so many de-facto restrictions placed on who can run, and especially on who can speak their voice on the nation's largest political debate stage?

While I certainly profess to know very little about our nation's politics, I can certainly attribute sociological factors and basic American values (or lack thereof) to argue that our presidential debates have lost my trust and faith in the voting process because it is no longer legitimate. This has been the case for some time, but it is better to be aware of this issue later than to have never bothered to recognize it at all.