The Republican debate in Iowa this past week is being universally awarded the Worst Debate Ever by most, if not all pundits. Jonathan Martin at The Politico wrote on Friday:

Dissatisfied with the debate here Wednesday that drew widespread scorn, Iowa Republicans will discuss on Friday the possibility of holding another forum before the January 3rd caucuses.

The debate this week, sponsored by the Des Moines Register and Iowa Public Television, was to have been the final gathering of the GOP contenders, but one well-placed Iowa Republican said tonight that they were interested in getting the candidates back together

“We’d prefer if the Register debate did not leave a bad taste,” said this source, who requested anonymity. “Iowa deserves a little better than that.”

The most likely possibility would be the week after Christmas, when many of the contenders are expected back in the state to make a final push before the voting.

I do agree with Allahpundit who wrote, “Do it well or don’t do it.”

The biggest obstacle will be the logistics of the short time left between the Christmas holidays and the Caucuses. Leaving that aside, what would make this debate worth doing?

I have a few suggestions:

• Limit the debate to Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Fred Thompson, and Mitt Romney. While I like both Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo, eliminating them along with Ron Paul and Alan Keyes (why was he included anyhow?) would allow for a much more substantive debate.
• Limit the number of questions. Allow more substance over quantity.
• Related to the above, allow the candidates time to answer, allow rebuttal, and encourage discussion.
• Find a moderator who can control all of the above, and ask relevant follow up questions. I have seen Rush suggested.

Add your suggestions in the comments. How many and what questions should be asked? Who should moderate? Format? Anything else?