The Republican (Mass.), Feb. 12:

It could be worse. The Republican National Committee announced a year ago that it would limit the number of presidential debates to between nine and 12.

That’s a far cry from the 27 debates and forums staged during the 2012 campaign. The RNC operatives felt that many so intramural clashes damaged their brand and their eventual nominee, but isn’t that happening again?

The Democratic race is down to two candidates. Watching Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders go head-to-head is undeniably appealing and can be informative – but even those candidates, particularly Sanders, are getting called out for repeating the same things.

The numbing cycle of debates could be serving to reduce the value of each one, especially on the GOP side, by forcing candidates to either repeat themselves (Marco Rubio) or go out of character just to make dramatic impact (Jeb Bush).

Rubio’s lifeless, robotic performance in New Hampshire was not of the 1988 Lloyd Bentsen-Dan Quayle magnitude (”Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy”) but may go down in debating legend. It could also profoundly affect the GOP race by instantly turning Rubio from a rising contender into a pallid, uninspiring wannabe to many voters.

By raising questions about Rubio’s ability to go beyond rehearsed talking points and speak from the mind and the heart, the New Hampshire debate might have provided a service as Americans learn more about him. The repetitive nature of these debates is such, though, that it’s difficult to expect truly creative and original thought from actors who are playing the same stage act on a regular basis.

Modern American political debating traces its roots to 1858, when Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas staged a series of seven Senate forums throughout Illinois. In those days, audiences had sketchy or no access to what had unfolded in previous debates, so every meeting had the feeling of opening night.

That is obviously not the case today. A debate in one primary state is viewed by the nation and the world, and the current schedule of forums makes this an ongoing, repetitive act that boils down to “gotcha” moments and whoone upped-whom rather than substance.

Reducing the debate load would be opposed by major media, so many of which want their turn to air the candidates and supply moderators and panelists. Whether so many debates are numbing voters to their meaning, though, and souring them on their choices and the entire process is a good question.

The RNC was right in 2012: there were too many debates. Maybe there still are.