That's how we (observers) get information we need to judge the relative merits of each side.
Unfortunately, Tucker Carlson's aggressive version of "Debate" only allows him to pontificate against his opponent ... which dis-allows the audience evaluate the relative merits of each side.
'You Wrote That': Tucker Battles CA Dem Calling for Federally Enforced Gun 'Buybacks' | Fox News Insider: Tucker Carlson debated a California Democrat who recently called for a law that would institute a government buyback program for "military-style semiautomatic assault weapons" and prosecute those who "defy" the policy by keeping those firearms. (video available at the link)It seems counter-productive to have a debate where the "host" brow-beats the "guest"; but that's the way the Internet works. In an interview with a 'hostile' guest (one who disagrees with the host), it's all about the money ... websites won't abide a host who loses his debate. And it's unlikely that Tucker Carlson is willing to undermine his "I'm Always Right!" position just to let a 'guest' get in a shot or two. (Excuse the expression.)
Not that we all agree with Gun Control people, but they are entitled to have their opinion. If we don't know what it is, how can we debate them?
The Fox News answer is .. we don't debate them. We bully them, and don't let them talk.
Piece of cake!
I expect better from people who speak for "my side".