In a surprise development yesterday, Joe Biden and serial sex abuser Donald Trump (SSAT) have agreed to two debates, one on June 27 hosted by CNN and the other on September 10 hosted by ABC. Both will start at 9:00 pm (ET). I say ‘surprise’ not because I did not think it would happen but because they came together so quickly, when usually these negotiations are quite protracted over all manner of details, such as who will host, the moderators, the venues, the format, and so on.
There will be no audience at the debates. This is a good thing. Audience reaction is very distracting. To take part, a candidate must get at least 15% in four national polls, a bar that is high enough to likely rule out third party and independent candidates.
SSAT’s acceptance of CNN and ABC as hosts signals a capitulation on his part since he has constantly whined about how they are biased against him. He must think that he will be so good in the debates, or is so desperate, that he can accept any terms.
Trump has also expressed other preferences. In an interview Wednesday morning with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, he agreed the debates “should go two hours” and also said he’d prefer if the men stand instead of sit.
“A stand-up podium is important,” he said, adding he thinks Biden wants to sit. He also said he would prefer the events take place in larger venues, before a live audience.
“It’s just more exciting,” he said.
The Biden campaign outlined its own preferences in a letter Wednesday. It wants candidates’ microphones muted when they aren’t recognized to speak to promote “orderly proceeding,” and it is opposed to live studio audiences.
“The debates should be conducted for the benefit of the American voters, watching on television and at home — not as entertainment for an in-person audience with raucous or disruptive partisans and donors, who consume valuable debate time with noisy spectacles of approval or jeering,” O’Malley Dillon wrote.be some issues to be decided.
Biden’s camp also argued third-party candidates should be excluded. “The debates should be one-on-one, allowing voters to compare the only two candidates with any statistical chance of prevailing in the Electoral College,” O’Malley Dillon wrote, “not squandering debate time on candidates with no prospect of becoming President.”
There should also, she wrote, “be firm time limits for answers, and alternate turns to speak — so that the time is evenly divided and we have an exchange of views, not a spectacle of mutual interruption.”
This debate is going to be anticipated, not for viewers to learn anything about each candidates’s plans, but to see who is more mentally competent. SSAT seems to think that he is a genius and a brilliant debater but Seth Meyers says that it is Biden who, while not bombastic like SSAT, has shown himself to be in command of the facts and details, much more so than SSAT. The audience-free format reduces the effectiveness SSAT’s favored rhetorical style of insults. He will of course brazenly lie because that is what he does. It remains to be seen if the moderators will fact check him in real time.
SSAT’s quick acceptance is interesting because I think he understands that debates are most valuable to underdog candidates. (See how he utterly refused to debate any of the other GOP candidates during the primary contest.)
I’m guessing Biden sees this as a chance to push back against claims he is too old and feeble to do the job, although I think that anyone who isn’t already committed (or resigned) to vote for Biden in order to keep SSAT out of the Oval Office is too brain-dead to be persuaded by anything.
From the POV of those who think that there must be violence and that the cruelty is the point, Trump did win that, because he repeatedly interrupted Biden. A rude power move that Biden ‘allowed’. Biden’s point was to demonstrate the rule of law. The moderators didn’t believe in this, or weren’t allowed to. And Seth showed this happening, extensively.
There’s a reason dude keeps on “mumbling” in court. It is not accidental. There’s a reason he keeps on violating the court order to not-speak and misrepresents what it is about. It is not accidental. Trump thinks that the judge might be risking a carreer-ender if the judge puts him in jail and then Trump becomes president. This is why those defective opinion polls keep on showing up in the fake news that show him winning are about. They have just one target. Just like he bribes politicians he also bribes the conservative owners of most of the media available out there. (probably doesn’t have to bribe them very hard)
It is an open threat, and it is seen by such by the people he wants to appeal to.
If I am correctly informed Biden successfully demanded the mikes would be turned off once a candidate has reached the end of the allotted time. This will stop Trump from interrupting, or going over time.
Weird that SSAT would agree to this term. Without bullying he is just a boring incoherent asshole.
Also, if he has genuine cognitive issues a time slot in the evening will not help him.
If they turn off his mic, he’ll just wander over to Biden to interrupt him, like he stalked Clinton during their debates. Will the moderators stop him?
re Ridana @4: That is when the shock collars that Biden also insisted each candidate wear during the debates will be most effective. Step out of the box, get some shocks! ;-P
Trump could have agreed if Biden wanted it on the moon. Trump’s not going to show up. I’ll give anybody 10:1 that the Orange Turd finds a way to weasel out and blame it on Uncle Joe.
Trump’s lap dogs are already complaining about the terms of the debates and Trump made a nonsense post about a Fox debate. So likely he is already trying to weasel out of the debates or at least setup the perception they are too biased.
I suspect he will complain for a while and then claim he doesn’t have the time because he is tied up in court and the whole thing is a scheme by Biden. It don’t think it will work though, the only people who will buy Trump’s line are the ones already dedicated to his cult.