President Donald Trump and Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden exchange points during the first presidential debate Sept. 29, 2020, at Case Western University and Cleveland Clinic, in Cleveland, Ohio. (AP Photo/Morry Gash, Pool, File)

I’ve said it before: It’s a bad idea for Joe Biden to debate Donald Trump. Not because Biden isn’t up to the task (he is) but because Trump doesn’t deserve to be a part of any of the normal trappings of a U.S. presidential campaign.

As a reminder, debates between “normal” candidates offer the voters a chance to weigh their differing ideas and explore the arguments that each martials to support their plans. That kind of debate is not possible when one of the candidates is Donald Trump. He is, as every journalist who has tried to cover him knows, a serial liar, a man who makes stuff up faster than it can be fact-checked. He also has no respect for the discussion of ideas. Instead, he is all about the outrage he can call up in a crowd. That’s not what debates are for.

If you want a better idea of what Donald Trump thinks public forums are really for, look no further than Jan. 6. That day, he used his platform as an armed mob to storm the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to overturn an election. This is not a man whose ideas can become better known through a debate format.

But as we appear headed for debates anyway, I’d like to suggest some changes that can help make the best of a very bad situation.

One and Done. Since a debate with Donald Trump is not a chance to discuss issues and ideas, but rather a circus where the best we can hope for is a sense of character and stamina, one debate will suffice. Trump — who you may recall refused to do a single debate during the Republican primary campaign — now claims he wants to do multiple debates with Joe Biden.  I’m sure the mainstream media companies would love that as well. The media is hungry for the spectacle, the ratings and the clicks such a cage match would provide. For Joe Biden, one debate will suffice to show he is up to the task. For the voters, one debate is truly all we can tolerate.

Put the League of Women Voters in Charge. Trump and the Republican National Committee have already torpedoed the idea of working with the Commission on Presidential Debates because of unfounded claims that the nonpartisan group is biased. It’s true that the CPD did host what is widely regarded as the worst presidential debate in history: the Biden/Trump/Chris Wallace debate debacle of 2020. That’s reason enough to put another group in charge this year. I nominate the League of Women Voters, which knows a thing or two about debates having hosted them since the 1920’s, including one of the first nonpartisan televised debates in 1976. As long as they were in charge, the debates were civil and substantive with a focus on the candidates and their positions. It’s certainly worth a try.

Journalists Only. Moderating a Biden-Trump debate is probably the worst job in the world.  Anyone who is tapped for the role this time must be a seasoned journalist with a record of success when it comes to speaking truth to power. The moderator must also hail from a well-respected, fact-based news entity. The same requirements should apply to any and all panelists, if that’s part of the debate format. It most certainly does not include anyone who takes a paycheck from an organization that has been found in a court of law to have lied to the public.

Mute Button. It worked well in the second debate of 2020, and it’s got to be put to use this time as well.

Almost Live. Let’s not put America through another live Wrestlemania brawl like the first Biden-Trump debate. Instead, record the debate and then share it with voters only after it goes through robust fact-checking. “Meet the Press” did record that now-infamous interview with Trump last year and then played it back with intermittent but inadequate fact checks. Fact-checking of this debate would have to be far more substantial with sound clips, on-screen graphics and other documentation.

Facts, Not Vibes. Live or taped, fact-checking has to be the top priority of a Biden-Trump debate. Respected media fact checkers like Daniel Dale of CNN could work together to provide real-time fact-checking across all platforms. After the debate, news platforms should do comprehensive fact checking segments and follow-up articles instead of rushing right into the typical vibes-focused punditry.

No Studio Audience. Since the fate of our democracy is on the line, we really don’t need to encourage a partisan pep rally by the audience. Keep it simple, like the 1960 Kennedy/ Nixon debate with just a moderator, panelists and two candidates in a studio.

New rules or not, I still strongly believe it’s a very bad idea to normalize a dangerous authoritarian like Donald Trump by letting him participate in a normal American political event. By this fall, Trump could also be a convicted criminal on top of everything else. That would be yet another reason to keep him off the debate stage.

But the “don’t debate” voices are being crowded out by Trump and the mainstream media, so I think our next best hope is to scrap the normal debate structure and replace it with significantly better guardrails. It would also help if our mainstream journalists could, as media critic Mark Jacob suggests, become fact crusaders by taking a very firm stand for truth at a likely presidential debate and in their everyday reporting.

Jennifer Schulze is a former Chicago journalist who talks media every month on WCPT 820AM on “Live, Local & Progressive with Joan Esposito” with former Chicago Tribune editor Mark Jacob. You can follow her on Threads @jenniferschulzechi or Twitter/X @NewsJennifer.