These dismal debates have debased British politics

<span>Keir Starmer and Rishi Sunak during the last live TV debate of the election campaign, at Nottingham Trent University on 26 June.</span><span>Photograph: Phil Noble/AFP/Getty Images</span>
Keir Starmer and Rishi Sunak during the last live TV debate of the election campaign, at Nottingham Trent University on 26 June.Photograph: Phil Noble/AFP/Getty Images

Has there ever been such a wretchedly dismal general election campaign (The Guardian view on televised election debates, the voters deserve better, Editorial, 27 June)? Such a miserable indictment of the current state of our politics and thoroughly rotten political system. This has culminated in the sordid betting furore, as potential MPs – public servants, let us remember – gamble on the “game” that is our shared future.

The final straw was last Wednesday’s desperate “debate” (it was no such thing) between the two leaders, one of whom will be our prime minister as of Friday. Who on earth thinks there is any value in the increasingly impolite exchange of unsubstantiated claims and counter-claims?

There cannot be a single other person who behaves in this way in their professional place of work, and what connection does any of this have to the day-to-day role of being an effective leader and prime minister? Time for change indeed.
Richard Bryant
London

• According to Thomas Jefferson, democracies get the government they deserve – and I believe that includes the campaign, the candidates and the level of debate as well. The only people to blame for the standards in our democracy are we, the voters. We chose to vote for a known liar just because he promised to “get Brexit done”. (He didn’t.) We rejected Ed Miliband because he looked a bit silly eating a bacon sandwich, and we rejected Neil Kinnock because he refused to reduce complex arguments to soundbites and was labelled the “Welsh windbag”.

We demonise the most vulnerable in our society because the rightwing press tell us to. So I disagree with your headline that voters deserve better. We are getting exactly what we deserve.
Daryl Birden
Great Dunmow, Essex

• Future leaders’ debates would be improved if the concept of “head to head”, which invites combat, were replaced by a format more likely to promote civilised discussion. Rather than standing behind podiums, participants should be seated in armchairs, with interruptions prevented by cutting off their microphones when it is not their turn to speak.
Peter Wrigley
Birstall, West Yorkshire

• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.