Harris v. Trump Debate Thread | DEBATE DISCUSSION THREAD
- Thread starter Centerpiece
- Start date
- Replies: 2K
- Views: 32K
- Politics
- Messages
- 4,130
@heelinhell posted:
www.rawstory.com
On Thursday afternoon Trump was abruptly overruled because, as Fallon claimed, his staff fears what he might say.
As Fallon wrote, "Update: Our latest understanding is that even though Trump said Monday he would be fine with an unmuted mic, his handlers don’t trust him to spar live with VP Harris and are asking ABC to ignore Trump’s comments and keep the mics muted or else they will back out of the debate for a third time. We have been asked to accede to Trump’s handlers’ wishes on this point for the sake of preserving the debate. We find the Trump’s team’s stance to be weak, and remain in discussions with ABC on the final rules"
Trump's team is overruling him on debate rules because they 'don't trust him': report
According to a senior adviser to Vice President Kamala Harris' presidential campaign, members of Donald Trump's campaign inner circle have overruled him on the use of mics during their first debate.As Democratic operative Brian Fallon posted to X, formerly known as Twitter, their latest demand...
www.rawstory.com
On Thursday afternoon Trump was abruptly overruled because, as Fallon claimed, his staff fears what he might say.
As Fallon wrote, "Update: Our latest understanding is that even though Trump said Monday he would be fine with an unmuted mic, his handlers don’t trust him to spar live with VP Harris and are asking ABC to ignore Trump’s comments and keep the mics muted or else they will back out of the debate for a third time. We have been asked to accede to Trump’s handlers’ wishes on this point for the sake of preserving the debate. We find the Trump’s team’s stance to be weak, and remain in discussions with ABC on the final rules"
sleehrat1955
Active Member
- Messages
- 30
You know, people like you who choose to bury your head in the sand are part of the problem. I don’t particularly “like” Harris, and Biden was my 3rd pick in 2020. But this isn’t a popularity contest. This is not a lesser of two evils situation. This is an inflection point moment in the history of our republic. This election is too important to sit on the sidelines.
ZenMode
Distinguished Member
- Messages
- 275
I think I will not be impressed by either candidate's performance.
- Messages
- 4,130
I expect about the same, though I expect to be far more outraged by Trump’s performance.
ZenMode
Distinguished Member
- Messages
- 275
I think I've become immune to Trump. He's said and done so many idiotic things, that I don't even get angry. It's like the one friend that passed out at every party. At first you're irritated, but eventually it's "whatever".
lightbluenc
Exceptional Member
- Messages
- 225
So by not being impressed by either, you’re saying the friend that passes out a party is the same as the one who can responsibly take care of themselves? Clearly one is more impressive than the other.
Also, if I have a friend that is passing out at parties his ENTIRE life, I’m probably not hanging out with that friend anymore.
ZenMode
Distinguished Member
- Messages
- 275
It was two separate thoughts that you are combining into one.
The passing out scenario was in regard to being outraged about Trump.
Neither Trump or Harris are the type of speakers that are likely to impress me....at least neither has to this point.
lightbluenc
Exceptional Member
- Messages
- 225
Why?
Centerpiece
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 546
I wasn’t impressed by either performance in the last debate myself.
For this one, I look for Trump to do as badly or worse than he did before. And I think vice president Harris is going to knock it out of the park and bury the poor bastard.
That’s what I think but what do I know?
Centerpiece
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 546
How to say I didn’t watch Harris‘s speech at the DNC without saying you didn’t watch Harris speak at the DNC
RockyMtnHoo
Distinguished Member
- Messages
- 299
I fully expect Harris to thrash him, but because the bar for Trump is so low, anything slightly better than a Biden-like June performance will be considered a draw by the media.
Sadly, yes.
Both Clinton in 2016 and Biden in 2020 beat Trump badly in debates but you'd never know it from the media coverage. I'm not even certain Trump beat Biden in June. The draw was a sad, pathetic spectacle. Again, the media obsessed with Biden and let Trump's constant lying slide.
Last edited:
ZenMode
Distinguished Member
- Messages
- 275
I watched it. It was fine, but not impressive. It was also likely reading from a teleprompter.
Trump can't help himself. With a teleprompter, he's a rambling idiot.
I've never seen Kamala speak where I found her impressive. Better than Trump, for sure, but not impressive.
Centerpiece
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 546
We’re all free to draw our own petty conclusions. At least in most of the World. Except if you’re a woman in Afghanistan where the Taliban has just made it illegal for a woman to speak - literally utter anything - in public. The American evangelical right wing is similar to the Taliban in a lot of ways. I’ll listen to and vote for those who are the furthest away from the American Taliban. But that’s just my own, petty conclusion.
sleehrat1955
Active Member
- Messages
- 30
I agree. Harris is not a dynamic orator like Obama was/is or that Clinton was. But I’m not deciding who to vote for on the basis of their delivery in a speech or debate. Much more significant factors are in play.
- Messages
- 4,130
She really surprised me with her convention speech — I thought it was miles better than anything I’ve seen from her previously and aN extremely well constructed speech.
That said, her skill set is what it has always been professionally — a prosecutor. Great in senate hearings and similar settings where she is prepared in advance and controls the forum, pretty good as a convincing speaker of prepared text, but not so good being questioned or off the cuff.
I think a lot of folks risk far too high expectations of her in the debate for this reason. Her first debate in 2019 she was primed, ready and nearly decapitated the Biden run. But beyond prosecuting that case, she didn’t seem prepared with a justification for her candidacy. And I say that as a fairly early (not significant, just early) donor to her presidential primary campaign who was prepared to go all in on her run.
She has course corrected tremendously in this campaign, in large part I think b/c she is freed from the shackles of denying who she is politically and professionally (a prosecutor) and from the pressure in that primary to be wrenched well to the left, but also she had undeniably grown as a politician since her disappointing first year or so as VP.
But she hasn’t been in a debate since 2020 and her last debate appearances were more or less about auditioning for VP. Sure, she could annihilate Trump if she actually got to prosecute him rather than debate him.
And I’m still hopeful she will land fierce body blows in the debate. But she’ll take some blows, too, from the moderators and from the pressure. TBD whether she has a glass jaw. For certain, she needs a better answer on the what would you do on day 1 question and I have an outline/suggestion if she wants to avoid policy details:
No matter what some would have you believe, the President is not a dictator, and as much as I would like to implement all my policies on day one, in reality the President mush and should work within our Constitutional framework to make changes. But on day one I will establish clear goals for our future and our children’s future (blah blah freedom, opportunity economy, etc).
Tim Walz should be useful framing the answer like every new sports coach who comes in talking about a setting a new culture of winning based on expectations, accountability, goals etc. — the speech that leaves dedicated fans declaring that they are ready to charge through a brick wall for the new coach pretty much every damned time.