Harris v. Trump Debate Thread | Trump DECLINES another debate (in ALL CAPS!)

Centerpiece

Centerpiece

Honored Member
Messages
938
The American Broadcast Company will televise the first debate: Harris v. Trump. Tuesday, Sept. 10; 9 pm Eastern.
I'm thinking the tables will be turned, considering the opponents this go around.

Thoughts?
 
Any politician that can put thoughts to words in a normal cadence would be able to debate circles around Trump if he actually respected normal debate protocol. The problem is that he doesn’t do that and uses these debates to insult his opponents and incoherently ramble using a bunch of buzz words that appeal to his base, and then calls it a win.

I understand why Harris will still do the debate and why his previous opponents have as well (not really an option to be the side that refuses to play ball, because of the optics), but I would 100% support her declining to participate and coming out and citing the fact that Trump never takes them seriously in the first place as the reason why.
 
Just prepare rebuttals to what you know he’s gonna say. Fact-check him live on air. Prepare this beforehand.

Project 2025, communism, socialism, stock market crash, after-birth abortions, his border bullshit, etc. Rinse, repeat.

You already know 90+% of what he’s gonna say.
 
Surprised there is not more discussion of the debate. It is just over 2 weeks away. I almost started a thread until I found this.

Granted, everyone is still coming off the high of the DNC. Harris and Walz will still be making campaign stops, but she absolutely needs to prepare and do very well. It was Biden's comatose performance in first debate that gave Trump a huge spike.

I totally disagree with Peppers that said she should skip. Only 6% watched DNC. She needs to do a few interviews before debate. Trump says there should be several debates. My guess is that if Harris makes him look the fool and liar he is, this will be last debate. He will refuse, unless on Fox.

I have many thoughts on how Harris could do great, and a few that would make her look bad. But I don't want to talk to myself, so I will wait until this topic gains traction.
 
Kraftyheel89 said:
Surprised there is not more discussion of the debate. It is just over 2 weeks away. I almost started a thread until I found this.

Granted, everyone is still coming off the high of the DNC. Harris and Walz will still be making campaign stops, but she absolutely needs to prepare and do very well. It was Biden's comatose performance in first debate that gave Trump a huge spike.

I totally disagree with Peppers that said she should skip. Only 6% watched DNC. She needs to do a few interviews before debate. Trump says there should be several debates. My guess is that if Harris makes him look the fool and liar he is, this will be last debate. He will refuse, unless on Fox.

I have many thoughts on how Harris could do great, and a few that would make her look bad. But I don't want to talk to myself, so I will wait until this topic gains traction.
Click to expand...
I take solace in the fact that she was a successful prosecutor and understands the importance of preparation.
 
I think there is going to be a dramatic difference in her performance in this debate and the Democratic primary 'debates' 4 years ago. Those are frankly just a ridiculous contest to get the sound bite to continue your viability. If you watch her performances in senate committees when she questioned Barr and Kavenaugh you will see how incisive she can be and will draw a clear contrast to trump. I hope she early on says she will have some sort of signal or codeword to point out every time Trump says some ridiculous lie and he is bound to do.
 
Great point Griff. That was one of my thoughts on how she could do poorly. If she had a repeat performance as her last primary debates (or maybe it was just one she didn't last very long.)

But like you, I do not expect that to happen. She was one of the least known of a large group and was overly nasty, against fellow Dems. And as you say, they are all like carnival barkers in those debates trying to get more camera time and sound bites, except for the leader going in.

Nobody can match Trump in his nastiness, he's got that voting block wrapped up. She needs to stick with the positive vibes and happy face, but destroy him with facts and quickly make his lies look foolish with a prosecutorial beat down in substance alone.
 
Kraftyheel89 said:
Surprised there is not more discussion of the debate. It is just over 2 weeks away. I almost started a thread until I found this.

Granted, everyone is still coming off the high of the DNC. Harris and Walz will still be making campaign stops, but she absolutely needs to prepare and do very well. It was Biden's comatose performance in first debate that gave Trump a huge spike.

I totally disagree with Peppers that said she should skip. Only 6% watched DNC. She needs to do a few interviews before debate. Trump says there should be several debates. My guess is that if Harris makes him look the fool and liar he is, this will be last debate. He will refuse, unless on Fox.

I have many thoughts on how Harris could do great, and a few that would make her look bad. But I don't want to talk to myself, so I will wait until this topic gains traction.
Click to expand...
IMO, Harris has to thread forceful and hopeful without venturing into perceived patronizing and mean, which are characteristics that have swirled in rumor around her for years, and would conflict with the joyful campaign tone. My hope is Harris doesn't get caught up defending against ttump’s barrage of lies (state “that’s not true” and move on to talking directly to the camera), doesn’t get bogged down in policy details, and doesn’t demean trump, while also have a couple of viral “bless your heart” moments. State your policy goals, how you plan to achieve them (broadly), and refer people to the details on the Harris/Walz website.

Amidst the book worthy layers of race, gender, and cultural dynamics, I presume the perception coming forth from the debate will center around whether Harris did enough to excite young voters and gain trust of middle/upper class white ladies, which were so very important for Biden’s election. Harris will be judged on damn near unachievable expectations, while ttump continues to benefit from expectations equating to “just don’t stroke out on live TV”. It’s gross. It’s our reality.

The debates make me nervous. I don’t perceive Harris as having much to gain, and having much to lose. I’m also jaded as a 2019 Harris supporter, when she monumentally failed my expectations. She isn’t trying to thread the 2019 needle, and appears grounded in a much more natural joyful, energetic, and protectionist prosecutor persona.
 
Kraftyheel89 said:
Great point Griff. That was one of my thoughts on how she could do poorly. If she had a repeat performance as her last primary debates (or maybe it was just one she didn't last very long.)

But like you, I do not expect that to happen. She was one of the least known of a large group and was overly nasty, against fellow Dems. And as you say, they are all like carnival barkers in those debates trying to get more camera time and sound bites, except for the leader going in.

Nobody can match Trump in his nastiness, he's got that voting block wrapped up. She needs to stick with the positive vibes and happy face, but destroy him with facts and quickly make his lies look foolish with a prosecutorial beat down in substance alone.
Click to expand...
I think there are two reasons she didn't do well in the primary debates:

1. She was debating multiple people on stage, and had difficulty finding her place on the left/moderate spectrum. I believe she felt there was room to position herself as a progressive, not quite at the level of Sanders and Warren, but definitely to the left of Biden, Buttiegieg, and Klobuchar. Unfortunately for her, that's difficult to pull off when she already had a reputation as a tough-on-crime DA in San Francisco. Tulsi Gabbard bludgeoned her with her own record of prosecuting drug-dealers at a time when many people were questioning our legal system and the role of police in it.

2. Second, the worst thing that can happen for a candidate during these crowded primary debates is to not make an impression at all. Kamala overcompensated for that by using what I call "tag-line tactics." It seemed every time she spoke, her goal was to provide a tag line that could go viral and set herself apart from the others. It worked briefly when she went at Joe Biden with the "That little girl was me" argument, but failed to resonate when subsequent attempts fell flat. At the end, it appeared as though she didn't know what she stood for, didn't really have any specific policies, and was just trying to create a campaign based on catch phrases. Check out the SNL debate skits with Maya Rudolph as Harris. She is spot on .

The good news is, I don't think I've ever witnessed a politician polish up her game over a four year stretch like Kamala Harris did. She is NOT the same candidate she was four years ago. Maybe some of that is due to the fact she's only being asked to run against a single, flawed individual, and maybe some of that is due to the fact that her previous "weakness" as a law-and-order type has now become a strength. But her transformation has been remarkable. So I do have hope that she can knock Trump around on a debate stage.
 
She should obviously do the debate but I couldn’t care less if she does more interviews, press conferences, etc. She owes the press nothing and what she’s been doing has been very effective in getting her message out. The fact that it’s the Pubs pushing for more spontaneous appearances is evidence she has more to lose than gain from them. Trump makes things worse for himself every time he speaks off the cuff.
 
WaynetheDrain said:
I think there are two reasons she didn't do well in the primary debates:

1. She was debating multiple people on stage, and had difficulty finding her place on the left/moderate spectrum. I believe she felt there was room to position herself as a progressive, not quite at the level of Sanders and Warren, but definitely to the left of Biden, Buttiegieg, and Klobuchar. Unfortunately for her, that's difficult to pull off when she already had a reputation as a tough-on-crime DA in San Francisco. Tulsi Gabbard bludgeoned her with her own record of prosecuting drug-dealers at a time when many people were questioning our legal system and the role of police in it.

2. Second, the worst thing that can happen for a candidate during these crowded primary debates is to not make an impression at all. Kamala overcompensated for that by using what I call "tag-line tactics." It seemed every time she spoke, her goal was to provide a tag line that could go viral and set herself apart from the others. It worked briefly when she went at Joe Biden with the "That little girl was me" argument, but failed to resonate when subsequent attempts fell flat. At the end, it appeared as though she didn't know what she stood for, didn't really have any specific policies, and was just trying to create a campaign based on catch phrases. Check out the SNL debate skits with Maya Rudolph as Harris. She is spot on .

The good news is, I don't think I've ever witnessed a politician polish up her game over a four year stretch like Kamala Harris did. She is NOT the same candidate she was four years ago. Maybe some of that is due to the fact she's only being asked to run against a single, flawed individual, and maybe some of that is due to the fact that her previous "weakness" as a law-and-order type has now become a strength. But her transformation has been remarkable. So I do have hope that she can knock Trump around on a debate stage.
Click to expand...
I would also add that primary debates are awkward by nature. You have to insult (for lack of better terms) your opponent, but not to the point that they won't have a shot in the general election.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top