Avoiding debates with Trump is a bad idea and not a winning political tactic. Up till now Trump’s entire campaign has been based on asserting that Biden has diminished metal capacity allowing him to be a captive of sinister, radical forces. Biden wins when he shows up and gives a solid, lucid and intelligent performance destroying Trump’s attempt to advance that narrative no matter what the liar-in-chief says. Debating a liar is also the perfect opportunity to point out and undercut those lies. Trump doesn’t do well when confronted. The Wallace and Swan interviews prove you have to go right at this phony con man, not let him say what he wants without any pushback. That’s when he looks like a babbling idiot, you’ve got to challenge him and knock him off his game. If Biden didn’t debate he’d look really weak to many voters and hand Trump a gift of an issue when he is a floundering candidate put in a corner by a pandemic he can’t and won’t do anything to mitigate. Biden will stand up there acting like a real POTUS, look in the camera and tell the American people what he is going to do with a national strategy for beating Covid. When he says Trump can lie all he wants but over 200,000 of our citizens, friends, co-workers and relatives are dead I think its game over.
Debates are one of the few chances that voters get to watch the candidates think on their feet, without a safety net. They don’t get to choose which reporter asks which questions. Chronic cheaters like Trump heavily depend on carefully picking from whom they’ll take questions.
Letting Trump off the hook for debates is exactly what he wants — not having to make an adult case for his policies, in a venue where his opponent is right there, calling him a lying fraud to his face. Hillary didn’t go far enough in calling Trump Putin’s puppet.
Debates are very unnatural formats. In no other setting does a President or other political leader have a time limit to talk. That doesn’t even happen in negotIations with other world leaders no matter how hostile.
The best candidate forum I ever saw was a Rachel Maddow program during the 2016 primaries in which she interviewed each of the Democratic candidates back to back. She asked substantive questions, including questions about criticisms that had been made of each candidate’s proposals and perceived weaknesses. I think she also asked audience questions. I got a much better feel for each candidate and their proposals during those interviews than I have ever gotten from a debate.
The media also influences the public’s perception of debates far too much by harping on minor slips of the tongue, one liners and other trivial matters. For example Reagan’s scripted quip about not exploiting McGovern’s youth and inexperience so impressed the media they decided Reagan’s age and weakening memory were no longer an issue. That was ridiculous as was proved by Reagan being clearly in the early stages of Alzheimer’s during his 2nd term.
Polls immediately after one of the Bush Gore debates showed Gore had clearly won. Then the right and the mainstream jumped on Gore’s demeanor and sighs. Within a few days polls showed the public thought Bush had won.
During the Clinton debates many were not aware of Trump's depravity, so debating him for the purpose of exposing that depravity made some sense. Now, it seems, everyone knows he is depraved and they either loathe it or embrace it. There seems to be no need to knock him off his game. Everyone knows the game. I liked your comment, but I am still leaning away from debates -- plus, I can't stomach seeing Trump any more than is necessary.
If Biden opts out, then Trump and company will say he's afraid to debate him. I like your idea of holding his taxes over the debate but Trump will never present the evidence of why he is beholden to Putin. And of course if Biden makes one faux-pas per Trumps constant lies, all we'll hear about is how Biden screwed up. It's a no win scenario. If it helps the media make it a race, even in their own narrative, then they will have accomplished what they set out to do. The media wants a horserace. The polls are showing a landslide. Debates that, again in the media's mind, show a weakened Biden is what they desire to make the race for the White House appear to be close. And that plays well for Trump who is already stoking the flames of a dishonest election. Geez, how'd we get here?
strategically, as you note, there's no upside for Biden. But I think he should opt out for another more important reasons, so he doesn't give a pathological liar a national platform.
Exactly - no national platform! Folks that insist that Biden debate...are normalizing. They just can't quite seem to understand that these are not normal times.
I am so thankful for you Eric. You absolutely get it.
No, I don't think he should debate a liar. That is not a debate; that is a circus! Twitler follows no rules; the moderator works for his propaganda machine and the stupid press (based on how they characterized Twitler and Hillary) have NO shame in playing the stupid both sides game vs. reporting the truth that Twitler is an unhinged undignified disgrace...which is what I am sure he will demonstrate in a debate. I wanted Biden's camp to say no debate unless Twitler releases taxes. Why should he and Faux News get rewarded with the trappings of normalcy and viewership (their anchor gets normalized by moderating the first "debate"), when they have not played by the rules.
I am sick about the thought of what this criminal will do during a debate.
For all the hand-wringing about these debates, you completely capture the problem here:
"The presidential debate format isn't designed to host a candidate who categorically refuses to be honest. When one of the two candidates ops out of the real world and occupies an alternative universe where the Covid-19 virus will soon "disappear" from America, then the debate no longer serves any real purpose. In fact, the debate becomes a hindrance to the electoral process and to democratic pursuits. The debates just become orgies of GOP misinformation."
HRC told us exactly what would happen in 2016 under Trump. Exactly. During the debates. Yet we heard the press talk/write about her emails.
Insanity is repeating the same mistakes expecting different results.
Tom Friedman wrote his annual almost useful column recently, arguing that if Biden is going to debate Mussolini's love child, he should insist on two things: that he release his taxes, and that there be a real-time fact-checker during the debate.
The one thing to bear in mind, though, is that this debate would not be between a woman and a serial sexual assaulter, but rather between a man and a serial sexual assaulter, which sets up an entirely different situation.
If a lot of other voices in the media support Friedman’s ideas then I think Biden should do it. My biggest fear is that if he refuses to debate the media will crucify him. But given how prone they are to a herd mentality if influential media voices chime in I would bet most of them would follow those influential voices.
Seems to me that making the debate contingent on Trump providing his tax information would be a mistake. We are going to get that information in other ways, and the requirement, which would never be agreed to by Trump, could seem petty to many people. On the second point: You (may I call you Eric?) did a very good job of explaining the futility of debating a pathological liar, a sociopath with no conscience, who has no concept of the meaning of debate. Just don't do it.
What the Biden team should do instead is a program which does a fair comparison of the 4 years of Former Guy with the 4 years of President Biden. The bonus piece could be Biden taking some questions from the press at the conclusion of the program.
I'm thinking 45 is playing "chicken" with the train. He's betting (hoping) on Biden bowing out. It's almost like he's debating Obama and it scares the orangeness right out of him. Biden will absolutely go head to head with the King Dong. I just hope that there's a factchecker involved and a damned fast one at that. More lies will hit the fan than a bag full of elephant's doo. That's my thoughts.
I think an absolute requirement to the debates should be live time fact checking. If Trump gets interrupted 100 times during a debate due to lying, it would be not only great entertaininment, but would get the facts out as quickly as he spews out his lies. I also think a well prepared Biden could make mincemeat out of the lying Orange Anus.
Avoiding debates with Trump is a bad idea and not a winning political tactic. Up till now Trump’s entire campaign has been based on asserting that Biden has diminished metal capacity allowing him to be a captive of sinister, radical forces. Biden wins when he shows up and gives a solid, lucid and intelligent performance destroying Trump’s attempt to advance that narrative no matter what the liar-in-chief says. Debating a liar is also the perfect opportunity to point out and undercut those lies. Trump doesn’t do well when confronted. The Wallace and Swan interviews prove you have to go right at this phony con man, not let him say what he wants without any pushback. That’s when he looks like a babbling idiot, you’ve got to challenge him and knock him off his game. If Biden didn’t debate he’d look really weak to many voters and hand Trump a gift of an issue when he is a floundering candidate put in a corner by a pandemic he can’t and won’t do anything to mitigate. Biden will stand up there acting like a real POTUS, look in the camera and tell the American people what he is going to do with a national strategy for beating Covid. When he says Trump can lie all he wants but over 200,000 of our citizens, friends, co-workers and relatives are dead I think its game over.
Debates are one of the few chances that voters get to watch the candidates think on their feet, without a safety net. They don’t get to choose which reporter asks which questions. Chronic cheaters like Trump heavily depend on carefully picking from whom they’ll take questions.
Letting Trump off the hook for debates is exactly what he wants — not having to make an adult case for his policies, in a venue where his opponent is right there, calling him a lying fraud to his face. Hillary didn’t go far enough in calling Trump Putin’s puppet.
Debates are very unnatural formats. In no other setting does a President or other political leader have a time limit to talk. That doesn’t even happen in negotIations with other world leaders no matter how hostile.
The best candidate forum I ever saw was a Rachel Maddow program during the 2016 primaries in which she interviewed each of the Democratic candidates back to back. She asked substantive questions, including questions about criticisms that had been made of each candidate’s proposals and perceived weaknesses. I think she also asked audience questions. I got a much better feel for each candidate and their proposals during those interviews than I have ever gotten from a debate.
The media also influences the public’s perception of debates far too much by harping on minor slips of the tongue, one liners and other trivial matters. For example Reagan’s scripted quip about not exploiting McGovern’s youth and inexperience so impressed the media they decided Reagan’s age and weakening memory were no longer an issue. That was ridiculous as was proved by Reagan being clearly in the early stages of Alzheimer’s during his 2nd term.
Polls immediately after one of the Bush Gore debates showed Gore had clearly won. Then the right and the mainstream jumped on Gore’s demeanor and sighs. Within a few days polls showed the public thought Bush had won.
Mondale?
Oops!
During the Clinton debates many were not aware of Trump's depravity, so debating him for the purpose of exposing that depravity made some sense. Now, it seems, everyone knows he is depraved and they either loathe it or embrace it. There seems to be no need to knock him off his game. Everyone knows the game. I liked your comment, but I am still leaning away from debates -- plus, I can't stomach seeing Trump any more than is necessary.
If Biden opts out, then Trump and company will say he's afraid to debate him. I like your idea of holding his taxes over the debate but Trump will never present the evidence of why he is beholden to Putin. And of course if Biden makes one faux-pas per Trumps constant lies, all we'll hear about is how Biden screwed up. It's a no win scenario. If it helps the media make it a race, even in their own narrative, then they will have accomplished what they set out to do. The media wants a horserace. The polls are showing a landslide. Debates that, again in the media's mind, show a weakened Biden is what they desire to make the race for the White House appear to be close. And that plays well for Trump who is already stoking the flames of a dishonest election. Geez, how'd we get here?
strategically, as you note, there's no upside for Biden. But I think he should opt out for another more important reasons, so he doesn't give a pathological liar a national platform.
Exactly - no national platform! Folks that insist that Biden debate...are normalizing. They just can't quite seem to understand that these are not normal times.
I am so thankful for you Eric. You absolutely get it.
No, I don't think he should debate a liar. That is not a debate; that is a circus! Twitler follows no rules; the moderator works for his propaganda machine and the stupid press (based on how they characterized Twitler and Hillary) have NO shame in playing the stupid both sides game vs. reporting the truth that Twitler is an unhinged undignified disgrace...which is what I am sure he will demonstrate in a debate. I wanted Biden's camp to say no debate unless Twitler releases taxes. Why should he and Faux News get rewarded with the trappings of normalcy and viewership (their anchor gets normalized by moderating the first "debate"), when they have not played by the rules.
I am sick about the thought of what this criminal will do during a debate.
Thanks Eric.
For all the hand-wringing about these debates, you completely capture the problem here:
"The presidential debate format isn't designed to host a candidate who categorically refuses to be honest. When one of the two candidates ops out of the real world and occupies an alternative universe where the Covid-19 virus will soon "disappear" from America, then the debate no longer serves any real purpose. In fact, the debate becomes a hindrance to the electoral process and to democratic pursuits. The debates just become orgies of GOP misinformation."
HRC told us exactly what would happen in 2016 under Trump. Exactly. During the debates. Yet we heard the press talk/write about her emails.
Insanity is repeating the same mistakes expecting different results.
agreed...Hillary did everything right during debates and it got her nothing. no need to allow trump to debate/lie again
Tom Friedman wrote his annual almost useful column recently, arguing that if Biden is going to debate Mussolini's love child, he should insist on two things: that he release his taxes, and that there be a real-time fact-checker during the debate.
The one thing to bear in mind, though, is that this debate would not be between a woman and a serial sexual assaulter, but rather between a man and a serial sexual assaulter, which sets up an entirely different situation.
real-time fact-checking, we’ve seen over the last four yrs, simply doesn’t work w/ Trump. In part, bc the lies he tells are so mountainous
If a lot of other voices in the media support Friedman’s ideas then I think Biden should do it. My biggest fear is that if he refuses to debate the media will crucify him. But given how prone they are to a herd mentality if influential media voices chime in I would bet most of them would follow those influential voices.
Seems to me that making the debate contingent on Trump providing his tax information would be a mistake. We are going to get that information in other ways, and the requirement, which would never be agreed to by Trump, could seem petty to many people. On the second point: You (may I call you Eric?) did a very good job of explaining the futility of debating a pathological liar, a sociopath with no conscience, who has no concept of the meaning of debate. Just don't do it.
you may! and thanks. I hope yr right act getting his taxes finally
What the Biden team should do instead is a program which does a fair comparison of the 4 years of Former Guy with the 4 years of President Biden. The bonus piece could be Biden taking some questions from the press at the conclusion of the program.
I'm thinking 45 is playing "chicken" with the train. He's betting (hoping) on Biden bowing out. It's almost like he's debating Obama and it scares the orangeness right out of him. Biden will absolutely go head to head with the King Dong. I just hope that there's a factchecker involved and a damned fast one at that. More lies will hit the fan than a bag full of elephant's doo. That's my thoughts.
I think an absolute requirement to the debates should be live time fact checking. If Trump gets interrupted 100 times during a debate due to lying, it would be not only great entertaininment, but would get the facts out as quickly as he spews out his lies. I also think a well prepared Biden could make mincemeat out of the lying Orange Anus.
So. For our resident liberal morons
Woodrow Wilson
Warren G. Harding
Calvin Coolidge
Herbert Hoover
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Harry S. Truman
Dwight D. Eisenhower
John F. Kennedy
Lyndon B. Johnson
Nixon - Leaked involuntarily
In other words, since the income tax began, more did NOT release than have!
You idiots
Thanks for playing...
I used to think we needed Warren to debate Trump, but now I see all we need is a few charts and two questions: "Why?" and "How?"
Joe will not last 5 minutes without standing on his tounge🤯