Will Harris accept the challenge to debate Trump?

[Always in His Presence]

Yes, yes… I’m pompous, I’m not being cast in a good light, I’m this, I’m that, because I’m saying somebody is wrong about something. I’ve heard it before, I’m sure I will hear it again. All that means to me is we’ve entered the “the only response I have to what you said is to lash out” phase of your responses, which means I’ve tapped the well of this discussion with you dry.

Might I offer a suggestion and perhaps argue the topic of the thread with a combination of facts and opinions and step away from "someone has not gone to debate school" and we both will find more productive communication.

The question is will Harris debate Trump?

What do you think?

 

[Always in His Presence]

well here we go!

Donald Trump and Kamala Harris are set to debate on ABC on September 10 after the former president said Thursday he had agreed to the faceoff, along with two others next month.

“ABC News will host qualifying presidential candidates to debate on September 10 on ABC. Vice President Harris and former President Trump have both confirmed they will attend the ABC debate,” the network said in a statement.

 

[Aldebaran]

well here we go!

Donald Trump and Kamala Harris are set to debate on ABC on September 10 after the former president said Thursday he had agreed to the faceoff, along with two others next month.

“ABC News will host qualifying presidential candidates to debate on September 10 on ABC. Vice President Harris and former President Trump have both confirmed they will attend the ABC debate,” the network said in a statement.

Looks like Harris didn't agree to the Sept. 3rd Fox debate.
At least Trump has proven to be flexible in where he debates. Maybe Harris will step up and do the same at some point.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Looks like Harris didn't agree to the Sept. 3rd Fox debate.
At least Trump has proven to be flexible in where he debates. Maybe Harris will step up and do the same at some point.

Good for her! Glad to hear it.

 

[Fantine]

We've been doing debates in the US for years.
Generally one is in a town hall format--not a rally hosted by the opposition.
I think a town hall would be a good compromise.
300 citizens--100 Trump supporters, 100 Harris supporters, 100 Independents pre-screened for neutrality.
The three groups would alternate questions.
Absolutely fair.

 

[probinson]

I thought Trump was afraid to debate? At least that was the narrative yesterday. It's hard to keep up with what the Democrats are saying from day to day.

 

[Belk]

Plenty of people also watch Newsmax, OAN, etc. They're also on Trump's "side".

Indeed. So let us skip the idea that media preferring a candidate is problematic. If anything it is much more tame then when the founders were trying to protect the news. If anything it is that it is to much of a monopoly so we are not getting a many points of view.

 

[Belk]

Looks like Harris didn't agree to the Sept. 3rd Fox debate.
At least Trump has proven to be flexible in where he debates. Maybe Harris will step up and do the same at some point.

I think it world be good to see how she handles it. Certainly an opportunity to see how she handles pressure.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Why don't you address the idea of why a news organization is always the host of a debate?

Again, I stated the reasons seemed obvious to me, but for those it doesn’t seem obvious to, a network would use a journalist or somebody from the media because they are educated in politics and they themselves are known quantities to the network. They’ve proven they can balance being informational with being viewable and dynamic and engaging. Their day jobs as interviewers serves them well in the position of moderator. Additionally, many of them have their own following and would draw viewers on their own merit. Additionally, the moderator may be familiar to the debaters, and a pre-existing banter or dynamic can be beneficial to all. The moderator knows how they will respond, the debaters will feel more at ease and familiar with the process of how the moderator operates.

In a practical level, having a known personality moderate two known politicians means the audience knows everybody there, and nobody is asking “who is this guy?” when they ask the hard-hitting questions or delivering a fact-check. It also probably is cheaper and easier to pull that person from a pre-existing stable of journalists who already work for the network vs. trying to pull over another network’s journalist. A network who likely won’t want their signature network journalist appear in people’s homes via another network.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Ok then. I doubt we'll see Trump's detractors giving him any credit for meeting his opponent at still another Left-leaning news organization. Trump keeps giving in to his opponent's wishes, but he won't get any credit for doing so.

No, we don’t pat him on the back for fulfilling the obligation he selected for himself, waffling on it for awhile, then returned to. I would have given him a tiny bit of credit for going to a debate without causing a scene before his tantrum, but not now.

Will there be a 3rd debate? Would Harris be willing to debate him at Fox News? Biden got what he wanted, and so did Harris. So why not have a debate just 1/3 of the time at a conservative venue? It would be an improvement, and a sign that the dems are willing to be reasonable and fair.

Maybe he should have floated that idea earlier in the process, not as a knee-jerk reaction to being afraid to fulfill the obligation he already made.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Might I offer a suggestion and perhaps argue the topic of the thread with a combination of facts and opinions and step away from "someone has not gone to debate school" and we both will find more productive communication.

Well, we can start by saying that I said you clearly take debate in high school, not that you didn’t go to “debate school.”

The question is will Harris debate Trump?

What do you think?

I have answered this, repeatedly. Refer to previous posts for the answer.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

I thought Trump was afraid to debate? At least that was the narrative yesterday. It's hard to keep up with what the Democrats are saying from day to day.

The narrative remains hasn’t changed.

 

[probinson]

The narrative remains hasn’t changed.

If Trump is afraid to debate Harris, why is he debating Harris?

 

[Tropical Wilds]

If Trump is afraid to debate Harris, why is he debating Harris?

Just because he’s doing (as of right now, anyway) it doesn’t mean he’s not afraid of doing it. His actions have shown that he was afraid enough to try and quit.

 

[probinson]

Just because he’s doing (as of right now, anyway) it doesn’t mean he’s not afraid of doing it. His actions have shown that he was afraid enough to try and quit.

Um, OK. I guess in your eyes, Trump is facing his fear and overcoming it.

I wonder if Harris will agree to the other two debates that Trump proposed.

 

[Aldebaran]

Indeed. So let us skip the idea that media preferring a candidate is problematic. If anything it is much more tame then when the founders were trying to protect the news. If anything it is that it is to much of a monopoly so we are not getting a many points of view.

The Founders protected the news media (First Amendment) because the Press was supposed to be the watchdog of the people against the government--to keep them accountable to the people. But now that the government has become big, with plenty of money and influence, the watchdog of the people has become the lap dog of the government--told when they can speak, and what questions they're allowed to ask, and with access only if granted credentials by the government. So the hand that feeds them is no longer the hand of the people.

 

[Aldebaran]

I think it world be good to see how she handles it. Certainly an opportunity to see how she handles pressure.

What pressure? Do you think she'll face pressure from Lindsey Davis of ABC? She's the same "journalist" that was openly hostile to Trump at the black journalist event. She's already shown herself to be totally biased, and now she's going to be a debate moderator.
No wonder Kamala wanted it this way. And no wonder they don't want an audience to be there. They know they'd be getting reactions from the people, and they don't want anyone to hear that.

 

[Belk]

The Founders protected the news media (First Amendment) because the Press was supposed to be the watchdog of the people against the government--to keep them accountable to the people. But now that the government has become big, with plenty of money and influence, the watchdog of the people has become the lap dog of the government--told when they can speak, and what questions they're allowed to ask, and with access only if granted credentials by the government. So the hand that feeds them is no longer the hand of the people.

Fox news is the governments lap dog? Newsmax? OAN? Are you kidding me?

 

[Belk]

What pressure? Do you think she'll face pressure from Lindsey Davis of ABC? She's the same "journalist" that was openly hostile to Trump at the black journalist event. She's already shown herself to be totally biased, and now she's going to be a debate moderator.
No wonder Kamala wanted it this way. And no wonder they don't want an audience to be there. They know they'd be getting reactions from the people, and they don't want anyone to hear that.

You have fun with that.

 

[Aldebaran]

Again, I stated the reasons seemed obvious to me, but for those it doesn’t seem obvious to, a network would use a journalist or somebody from the media because they are educated in politics and they themselves are known quantities to the network. They’ve proven they can balance being informational with being viewable and dynamic and engaging. Their day jobs as interviewers serves them well in the position of moderator. Additionally, many of them have their own following and would draw viewers on their own merit. Additionally, the moderator may be familiar to the debaters, and a pre-existing banter or dynamic can be beneficial to all. The moderator knows how they will respond, the debaters will feel more at ease and familiar with the process of how the moderator operates.

In a practical level, having a known personality moderate two known politicians means the audience knows everybody there, and nobody is asking “who is this guy?” when they ask the hard-hitting questions or delivering a fact-check. It also probably is cheaper and easier to pull that person from a pre-existing stable of journalists who already work for the network vs. trying to pull over another network’s journalist. A network who likely won’t want their signature network journalist appear in people’s homes via another network.

Now take everything you just said and look at how Lindsey Davis treated Trump at the black journalist convention. She's the one who will be one of the two moderators of the September debate. If that's what passes as "a known personality", then it's obvious that lack of bias is not a qualification you want.