Question: What is a requirement to succeed in the 2016 presidential race? Answer: A sensational response to a controversial and touchy issue. No longer does platform and political achievement spell success for presidential nominees, and the new set of requirements for the leader of the free world may be surprising. With so many characters high in the polls, and little coverage of real issues, the race to become president in 2016 is shaping up to resemble a game of Family Feud.

Question: What are the candidates’ plans for their presidency? Answer: Nobody knows, and that’s the problem. With all the debates and constant coverage, voters may be surprised to find that they know very little about what any of the candidates would do as president. For instance, some candidates recently put out potential tax plans, and economists have been criticizing and commenting on them for weeks, but many people don’t even know they exist. A portion of these tax plans are extremely radical and would have huge implications for the American budget and taxpayer, but tax plans just aren’t sensational enough to be shown on the news.

Question: If real issues aren’t shown on the news, what is? Answer: Scandals and corrupt, offensive behavior. Americans vote not based on platform, but based on name recognition, and nothing gives name recognition like scandals (this seems to be the main strategy of Donald Trump’s campaign). The main problem with a political system that chooses its leaders like this is that it encourages candidates to engage in corrupt or plainly offensive behavior just to win the game show of politics, while it glosses over lack of actual leadership skill.

Question: If a politician isn’t qualified to lead a government, who is? Answer: A neurosurgeon, a CEO, or a reality TV star. One unique part of the presidential race is that many of the frontrunners are not career politicians and have not, in fact, ever done anything more than give money to a campaign that suits them. This is likely because voters, especially the GOP voting base, is understandably fed up with the government as an entity. Congress is the least productive it’s been since the 1940s and many feel their wishes are not being represented. While this is a legitimate concern, the US should be wary of promoting anyone straight from regular citizen to leader of the free world. Without a strong understanding of the way government functions practically, a president with no experience is likely to have a learning curve while they settle in, and a president can’t afford to make too many mistakes. Also, it seems unlikely that someone with so few established political dealings will be able to tackle the mess that is Congress. Congress needs an executive who can smooth over differences between the parties and work with anyone to kickstart productivity again, and it’s unlikely that someone with no familiarity with lawmaking has the political prowess to do so. The strategy to reduce corruption in the government by reducing the number of politicians in the government may be misplaced.

Question: What’s really wrong with the 2016 presidential race? Answer: It’s complicated. The emphasis on name recognition and the complete lack of coverage on actual issues means it’s become little more than a race to see who can say more crazy things faster. Voters’ lack of trust in government means they’re desperate for anything new and eat the media’s coverage right up. The candidates and media are treating the presidential race like a silly game. It’s time for America to disconnect the buzzer from the podium and remember that this is a real election with real consequences.