Will Harris accept the challenge to debate Trump?

[Aldebaran]

Not really no.

Here's Trump talking on the campaign trail about giving federal immunity to police:

Former President Donald Trump unveils campaign promises

He said he would give federal immunity to police and make burning the American flag a crime punishable by one year in jail.

www.2news.com

Here he is trying to explain his position to a black Journalist:

If you can watch those two and tell me what Trumps position on immunity for police is you are a better interpreter than I am.

What does the journalist's skin color have to do with anything?

 

[variant]

What does the journalist's skin color have to do with anything?

Well, as you stated in the first post I replied to, he was speaking with the national association of black journalists (the NABJ).

The Journalist in question decided to ask him a question central to to the interests of the black community.

Why indeed should police be given federal immunity and what would that entail?

The word salad he comes up with doesn't even begin to answer her question or clarify his position.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Trump met Biden on CNN

Will Harris have the same strength to debate Trump on FOX?

Debate him? She will prosecute him on stage.

 

[Belk]

What do you mean “but why”. I read and listen to both sides all the time. I call it being informed. Listening to only one side makes you intellectually myopic.

OK. That is a good explanation. Thank you.

 

[Belk]

It seems that her lack of transparency has become rather opaque to her supporters, so it needs to be pointed out.

Give it time. I'm sure it has been somewhat of a whirlwind for her.

 

[Aldebaran]

Debate him? She will prosecute him on stage.

A prosecutor asks leading questions. As a candidate, her mike will be shut off if she starts trying to play that role. That's if the debate is on Fox. If it's ABC, she'd probably be allowed to do it, and the moderators would no doubt pile on. It wouldn't be much of a debate, but at least the public would have the chance to see that she still doesn't want to answer questions, but only be in a position to ask them.

 

[Aldebaran]

Give it time. I'm sure it has been somewhat of a whirlwind for her.

I'm sure it has. But she has the MSM's support. I watched news reports about her campaign stops today. The reporters were getting emotional while fawning over her. JD Vance went to the same places she did, but the reporters only seemed to report on his visits as an afterthought.
When a candidate has the backing of the mainstream media (which is supposed to be more of a watchdog rather than an endorser) that candidate doesn't have much to worry about.

 

[Belk]

I'm sure it has. But she has the MSM's support. I watched news reports about her campaign stops today. The reporters were getting emotional while fawning over her. JD Vance went to the same places she did, but the reporters only seemed to report on his visits as an afterthought.
When a candidate has the backing of the mainstream media (which is supposed to be more of a watchdog rather than an endorser) that candidate doesn't have much to worry about.

And Trump has the most watched cable news program on his side. The news it not meant to be any one thing which is why the constitution gives it such strong protections.

 

[KCfromNC]

Originally when Trump agreed to the ABC debate it was to be with Biden as the nominee (that changed).

Yeah, we all get it - Trump is backing out because he's now scared to debate the current Democratic frontrunner.

 

[KCfromNC]

Same reason Trump agreed to debate on CNN, and even went to the black journalist organization knowing that it wasn't a friendly crowd.

Not friendly is different from having to pay 3/4 of a billion dollars for lying.

He's not afraid to face those who wish to question him.

He just had to bail early from the latter interview when it went badly for him.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

A prosecutor asks leading questions. As a candidate, her mike will be shut off if she starts trying to play that role. That's if the debate is on Fox.

And there in lies the issue. Having a network that says “she’s about to catch him out and make him look bad, so shut off her mic” is not how debates are done. If even you are acknowledging FOX would do that, then you’ve just explained why she has a reason to not go. It’s not a debate, it’s her standing there while he yells and screams about nonsense without the hassle of hearing her inevitably more coherent retort.

 

[Aldebaran]

And Trump has the most watched cable news program on his side. The news it not meant to be any one thing which is why the constitution gives it such strong protections.

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

 

[Aldebaran]

Yeah, we all get it - Trump is backing out because he's now scared to debate the current Democratic frontrunner.

The agreement was between Biden and Trump. Biden is the one who backed out.

 

[Aldebaran]

Not friendly is different from having to pay 3/4 of a billion dollars for lying.

Networks don't lie. Only people do.

He just had to bail early from the latter interview when it went badly for him.

Interview? Is that what you call ambushes now?

 

[Aldebaran]

And there in lies the issue. Having a network that says “she’s about to catch him out and make him look bad, so shut off her mic” is not how debates are done. If even you are acknowledging FOX would do that, then you’ve just explained why she has a reason to not go. It’s not a debate, it’s her standing there while he yells and screams about nonsense without the hassle of hearing her inevitably more coherent retort.

Ok, so are you now saying you don't want the mic turned off when the other person is speaking?

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Ok, so are you now saying you don't want the mic turned off when the other person is speaking?

If they’ve gone past their time and are rambling like an insane person, yes. If they are in their allotted time or just after it but very imminently wrapping up a coherent point, no.

If it’s your scenario, where the candidate you don’t like is getting ready to lead the candidate you do like off the proverbial cliff and the mic is shut off to prevent that, definitely not. That’s not a debate.

 

[Aldebaran]

If they’ve gone past their time and are rambling like an insane person, yes. If they are in their allotted time or just after it but very imminently wrapping up a coherent point, no.

If it’s your scenario, where the candidate you don’t like is getting ready to lead the candidate you do like off the proverbial cliff and the mic is shut off to prevent that, definitely not. That’s not a debate.

Yeah, I don't see that happening. Besides, it's not the job of one candidate to lead the other anywhere. They're just supposed to answer the questions given to them by the moderator, along with what ever else they want to add. Asking each other questions, at least on a regular basis, isn't the way it's done. I'll also add that it's not the job of the moderator to argue their own viewpoints with a candidate they don't like and call it a "fact check". The moderator is there to ask the questions and give each side their allotted time, but not to try to influence the debate to their own liking. They should be more like a referee.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Yeah, I don't see that happening. Besides, it's not the job of one candidate to lead the other anywhere.

Somebody clearly didn’t take debate in high school, lol.

They're just supposed to answer the questions given to them by the moderator, along with what ever else they want to add. Asking each other questions, at least on a regular basis, isn't the way it's done. I'll also add that it's not the job of the moderator to argue their own viewpoints with a candidate they don't like and call it a "fact check". The moderator is there to ask the questions and give each side their allotted time, but not to try to influence the debate to their own liking. They should be more like a referee.

If they’re a referee, it’s actually their main job to keep order by pointing out when somebody is wrong, lol.

 

[Aldebaran]

Somebody clearly didn’t take debate in high school, lol.

If they’re a referee, it’s actually their main job to keep order by pointing out when somebody is wrong, lol.

It's up to the voting public to decide who is right or wrong. A referee (in a football scenario) makes sure the play is done according to the rules, and that's it. Ask a question, allow a certain amount of time for the answer to be given, then allow the opponent his time for rebuttal. The moderator isn't there to argue for or against what either side says.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

It's up to the voting public to decide who is right or wrong. A referee (in a football scenario) makes sure the play is done according to the rules, and that's it. Ask a question, allow a certain amount of time for the answer to be given, then allow the opponent his time for rebuttal. The moderator isn't there to argue for or against what either side says.

Um, facts are facts. When somebody gets facts wrong, the moderator points it out. There’s no “voters decide facts,” lol.