Trump interrupted Clinton 22 times in only the first 26 minutes, causing mainstream media to jump to Clinton's defense, sparking a renewed discussion on what's known as 'Mansplaining', defined by Marriam-Webster as "What occurs when a man talks condescendingly to someone (especially a woman) about something he has incomplete knowledge of, with the mistaken assumption that he knows more about it than the person he's talking to does."
While this does technically explain Trump's actions, we have to remember he also interrupted Lester Holt, the debates moderator, a total of 27 times, so it is probably more appropriate to relate this with a lack of maturity than with Trump's rampant misogyny. (If you're not yet convinced that Trump is sexist, a quick google search should sort that out for you, but this article by TheTelegraph should suffice.)
While The Commission on Presidential Debates has announced it plans to allow for questions from the public and audience following complaints about Holt's choice of questions, the CPD should put serious consideration into another change for the next debates: allowing candidates to speak without interruption by muting their opponent's microphone until it's their turn to talk.
While it's true that drama creates ratings, the presidential election should be held at a higher standard that that of The Kardashians.
Allowing the candidates to speak without the fear of interruption would give audiences (voters) a chance to hear out each politician's (a term not really applicable to Trump) argument, meaning they could then make up their minds without being distracted by childish and incoherent outbursts.
The next presidential debate is Sunday, October 9, so tune in and hopefully we'll see a little more professionalism from the people campaigning to run our country.
What do you think they should change for the next debate? Let me know on Facebook at Just Jynn or email me at email@example.com