Debate shouldn’t be all about the spectacle

It’s fitting that tonight’s third and final presidential debate is taking place here in Las Vegas, the entertainment capital of the world and a city that sure knows how to put on a good show.

Ratings for the contest are sure to be stratospheric (no pun intended) because this will be the last face off between the candidates this election cycle. Anything can happen, and — like a stock car race — millions will tune in to see if there’s a spectacular crash.

Will Hillary Clinton remain impervious to Donald Trump’s attacks, even in light of new revelations into the investigation of emails sent and received while she served as secretary of state? Will Trump remain calm in the face of attacks from Clinton over how he’s treated women during his career as a developer and TV star?

Oh, and one other thing: Will anybody get to talk about the administration of government in the United States for the next four years? Because that would be nice to hear about, too.

Although most Americans don’t like their choices for president and aren’t excited about going to the polls to support either Trump or Clinton, the fact is, one of them will become the next president of the United States (sorry, Gary Johnson and Jill Stein). Voters of both parties spoke at their respective primaries, caucuses and conventions — and we’re saddled with their choices.

Thanks a lot, voters of both parties.

That being the case, it would be wonderful if tonight’s moderator — Chris Wallace of Fox News — could force the candidates to speak in detail about their actual approach to issues, rather than simply defend themselves from myriad scandals.

Yes, that’s like trying to resist the siren song of leftover Halloween candy in favor of peas and carrots in the next room. But a little suffering is essential to the preservation, promotion and prolonging of democracy.

While it’s fun to tally up how many different pejoratives Trump has used to describe immigrants from Mexico, and while such a tally certainly drives many Latino voters into the Clinton camp, it’s worth digging a bit deeper into the issue.

Trump claims Mexico will pay for the new border wall (it won’t), but how precisely will he pay for the thousands of new federal employees who will be needed to begin his program of deporting millions of illegal immigrants? What will he do when a court strikes down his program of “extreme vetting” for immigrants or refugees from countries known for terrorism?

And — assuming there will still be Republicans after Nov. 8, and that these Republicans will still control at least one house of Congress — how will Hillary Clinton fulfill her promise to advance a comprehensive immigration reform plan with a pathway to citizenship?

Too many members of a safe, gerrymandered Republican House caucus still oppose such an approach. And what will Clinton do when — as has repeatedly happened under President Barack Obama — courts strike down immigration executive orders that usurp the authority of Congress to exercise exclusive legislative power?

That’s just one issue. Wallace will also ask about the national debt and entitlement programs; the economy and jobs; nominations to the U.S. Supreme Court; foreign hot spots and the fitness of each candidate to serve as president. (That last one has the potential of derailing the debate with more Trumpian threats to send Clinton to the brig.)

Las Vegas is known as a city that produces great shows, from the Strip to the Smith Center. But it’s worth remembering today that this is more than a stage production. It’s the future of a great nation, struggling to find its way forward in an uncertain and dangerous world.

That calls for some serious talk.

Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal political columnist. Follow him on Twitter (@SteveSebelius) or reach him at 702-387-5276 or SSebelius@reviewjournal.com.