It used to be the case that people would argue over whether debates between the presidential nominees really mattered but that is no longer the case. The dramatic fallout following the Joe Biden-creepy Donald Trump debate on June 27 has settled that issue. I recall watching it with a sinking heart as Biden fumbled his way through it and afterwards resigned myself, barring some kind of miracle, to watching a slow motion train wreck as the Democrats headed towards defeat in November. I did not think it was possible to change the nominee at that late stage.
And yet, that is what happened, and it was the debate that precipitated it as enough influential figures in the Democratic party felt that Biden was no longer capable of winning and would drag the party down. To his credit, Biden, after going through various stages of grief and denial, seemed to have finally reconciled himself to the calls to step down, not an easy thing for a career politician to do, and as a result we have seen a truly astonishing change in fortunes, in which Kamala Harris rapidly replaced him as the presumptive nominee, unified the party base, and attracted new people, so that she has surged to a small lead in the polls. The situation is still dicey but at least an improvement from dire.
This has naturally increased interest in any future debate. Biden and Trump had agreed to a second debate of September 10th, this time moderated by ABC News, on the same terms as the first, in which the two speakers would stand at podiums, there would be no opening statements, no audience, and microphones would be cut off when a speaker’s time was up, so that they could not filibuster or interrupt the opponent. All these were designed to favor Biden. He is a speechmaker, not a debater, and is no particularly adept at the rapid cut-and-thrust required to succeed in the latter format. I recall seeing him in the Democratic primary debates in 2020 and when responding to a question, if the moderator said his time was up, he would politely stop even in mid-sentence, although others would at least finish their thought and even try to go beyond. In such a format, creepy Trump could easily steamroll him and dominate the time so Biden’s advisors clearly chose a format where that could not happen.
There are those that argue that this did provide some benefit to creepy Trump in that it prevented him from going off on some random tangent, as is his wont, and say something outrageous. But to exploit that weakness would require someone with debating skills who could quickly pick up on the gaffe and turn it to their advantage. It also would require someone who is able to get under the skin of creepy Trump and needle him, to goad him into reckless statements. Biden does not have those skills but Harris likely does, and that is probably why the Harris camp tried to change the debate format to eliminate the mic cut-off rule. Creepy Trump’s advisors, sensing the danger, opposed the change but their man, egomaniac that he is, dislikes being cut off and enjoys the idea of talking more and seemed to be willing to accept the change.
Creepy Trump was still whining that ABC is not fair. As evidence, he pointed to a lawsuit that he has filed against George Stephanopoulos and ABC News. Stephanopoulos had said that creepy Trump had been found guilty of rape against E’ Jean Carroll. The issue is complicated and awaiting trial.
While a Manhattan federal jury last year found that Trump sexually abused Carroll, and held him liable for battery, the jury did not find that she proved her claim that he raped her. However, months later, while dismissing Trump’s countersuit against Carroll, US Judge Lewis Kaplan concluded that the claim Trump raped Carroll was “substantially true,” writing that “he ‘raped’ her in the broader sense of that word, as people generally understand it, though not as it is narrowly defined by New York state law.
But by vacillating over whether he would take part in the ABC debate or not, creepy Trump left himself open to the charge of cowardice by Harris, who repeatedly taunted him with the line at her rallies, “If you have something to say to me, say it to my face!”, to loud roars of approval. So he finally accepted the debate under the previous debate rules and that is what we will have. But Harris probably has good debate skills including the one where you goad your opponent into saying something that they should not. Let’s see.
It is becoming clear that the creepy Trump camp looks on debates as a way of reversing the slide in their fortunes and wants them more than the Harris camp does. Creepy Trump has proposed more debates at venues and formats more to his liking (such as moderated by Fox News, in large venues, with an audience) but the Harris team has not agreed. It looks like they want to stick to the original schedule agreed to by the Biden team.
But in this wild race, things can change very quickly.
I hope Harris has the wisdom not to cave to Republican demands (a very common flaw among Democrats).
She and other Dem candidates have the ‘momentum’ behind them, the important thing is to not stumble but calmly let the creepzoids self-destruct.
The Republicans will benefit from any mistake and too much is at stake (I live an ocean away but that is no protection from another Trump administration). We have already seen the media are unwilling to debunk Republican talking points (as it might repel Republican readers/viewers and reduce the profit from ads).
Sowing discord between Trump and his handlers could itself have been an anticipated benefit of Harris suggesting the change.
I watch the polls in a downright compulsive manner, and considering the improving situation I would say “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.
Let SSADT sit in Mar-a-Lago and turn putrid. If he demands debate rule changes it is a perfect opportunity to say no to debates.
Harris being a former prosecutor, she undoubtedly does have skill at goading an opponent into things they shouldn’t say, and at responding to arguments on the fly.
I think that Trump’s vanity will win him this one, he’s not able to resist the opportunity to run off at the mouth and he thinks he’s good at it. He also doesn’t listen to advisers when they’re telling him something that he doesn’t want to hear.
I think they ended up with the previous rules because both of them really need the debate. They would both like different rules but don’t have much time for negotiations and don’t want the same things. Trump obviously needs to get his campaign back on track and would lose a lot of his base if he is seen as backing down to a woman. Harris needs to show that she can stand up in the big league. So far she has only appeared in staged campaign events, and she doesn’t have much of a history or reputation nationally.
I suspect Trump vacillated on doing the debate because he doesn’t really want to debate. He wanted to find a way out but realizes he can’t be seen as backing out. So he has dithered around and tried to come up with an excuse but finally accepted doing it when he ran out of time.
birgerjohansson@3,
It seems to have been Harris who wanted a change of rules, so that mics would stay open throughout. Trump seemed to be OK with this, but his handlers not.
KG @6: I wouldn’t be surprised if Harris is hoping for CFT to be caught using misogynistic and/or racist slurs, and his handlers are trying to minimize the chance of that happening.
anat@7,
Yes, I’m sure that’s at least part of it! But Harris may also want to point out a selection of Trump’s lies as soon as he tells them (e.g. the one about everyone wanting Roe v Wade overturned).
This analysis of the latest polls turned up an hour ago. It seems Trump has a difficult road to reach 270 in the electoral college. This is why I worry about what might happen if Harris gets a cold in time for the debate. If you have an edge, don’t risk it.
The TEC show
“The 2024 Election Map Based On Polling Averages From All 50 States”
.https://youtube.com/watch?v=2vZu0c9gOE8
Kamala Harris is a criminal prosecutor so of course she would want open mics so everyone hears the nasty comments that he WILL make while she is speaking.
He will be racist and misogynistic because that’s who he is. He has no other policy since he is primarily running to game the justice system. It was a grudge match with Biden as his opponent, since he is also a massively petty criminal with an over- inflated ego.
It’s going to be an interesting event, though I don’t think there will be much actual debate.
He will try to dominate and control, and she will proceed to help him make an enormous fool of himself in public. It’s his own supporters who are demanding that he sticks to the debate agreement, and calling him a chicken for trying to back out.
Harris campaign rejects Trump claim on agreement over hot mics for Sept. 10 debate
I suspected this might be the case. Harris’ campaign needs to get faster on replying to this sort of thing. This isn’t a court where Harris has X number of days to respond and how long they take doesn’t matter much, it’s a matter of public opinion. Every hour that Trump’s story gets before a response makes Harris look bad.
On this issue there is also the issue of giving Trump an escape. The longer they argue on these things the easier it gets for Trump to back out and say he wouldn’t give in to Harris’ demands to change the format.
I don’t see how Trump lying on Tuesday and being corrected by the Harris campaign today makes Harris look bad.
She has no issue with hot mics. She isn’t trying to back out of the debate. She has repeatedly said as much at all her rallies. It is only the liar and staff that keep inventing difficulties, because he truly has no self control whatsoever due to his diminished mental capacity.
The Harris campaign’s reply to his false claims is (unsurprisingly) the final paragraph in the link @11
It looks bad to delay the response because it is something that the campaign could have responded to quickly. Giving them an hour or two to confirm what was agreed to this shouldn’t have taken more then an hour or two. The longer the Harris campaign takes the harder it gets to make people aware that what Trump said wasn’t true.
There were already agreed on terms for the debate. It was the terms that Biden negotiated but Harris agreed to them when she agreed to the debate. The two sides can negotiate new terms with ABC if they want but Harris is the side that wants to make the mics hot, Trump only said that he didn’t care. I’m sure the Trump campaign wants something out of Harris to change the terms and likely Trump’s handlers would prefer the mic be off.