But strategically, practically nothing to gain here for Trump. Doubtful he’d even do this fictional Fox debate. That’s CYA. Harris ain’t the best speaker, we all saw that four years ago. But Trump is a catastrophe. Why would he do this?
Parties are not government entities and their procedures are entirely their own to decide, and no one is obligated to support any party. As political scientist E. E. Schattschneider said many decades ago, “Democracy is to be found between the parties, not within them.”
A network with a 787M dollar judgement against them for defamation shouldn’t be allowed to host a dog show, let alone a presidential debate. Plus the fact that they defended themselves in another lawsuit that they are an entertainment company and not “real” news.
I was speaking hypothetically I don't think either Fox or Trump would agree to the conditions for a fair debate especially mutual agreement on the moderators. Trump obviously wants one of the Fox infotainment stars to moderate and there is no way that Harris would agree to it.
Correct. And this is even more true given that Biden set the terms for the first debate. The case Democrats seem to be making is that Trump must meet them on the stage on their terms while under indictment, after being shot at, and after Democrats swap the nominee at the 11th hour or else he’s a coward. I think it’s their turn to throw Trump a bone as far debate terms go. And if they disagree, this doesn’t have to happen.
The fact of the matter is Kamala is an unknown for a great swath of the American public. And she currently has the best PR wing a political candidate can hope for in what’s essentially a shortened Presidential election, the mainstream media. So Trump needs to make sure the focus is on her. Everyone knows he’s a flawed candidate, but so is she, so he needs to hide those weaknesses while highlighting hers. If a debate becomes entirely an attack on Trump without any focus on Harris, that’s an extremely risky scenario for the Trump campaign, which is why he would be smart to dictate the terms as much as possible here.
I read the terms were negotiated between CNN and the two campaigns. Can you substantiate your claim? I am supremely dubious of the claim and the source. "With less than two weeks until the first presidential debate of the 2024 election cycle, CNN has released additional details on the parameters agreed upon by the Trump and Biden campaigns. The debate, which will be hosted by CNN’s Jake Tapper and Dana Bash in Atlanta on June 27, will mark the first in-person showdown of the 2024 campaign between President Joe Biden and his predecessor, former President Donald Trump. Both candidates have accepted the network’s invitation and agreed to accept the rules and format of the debate, as outlined in letters sent to the campaigns by the network in May." https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/15/politics/trump-biden-cnn-debate-rules/index.html
So no proof. Gotcha. You do everyone a disservice by positioning assumptions as facts. Such low quality content.
nobody set the terms. it was mutually agreed upon...seriously? poor poor victim, poor donnie boy, worlds biggest victim..
I saw Biden speak in person while VP. He didnt stutter a word. He was funny and engaging and I felt it an honor to be there. This whole marble mouthed excuse is silly. The poor man is way beyond that. Trump isnt doing great in that regard, but is still pretty quick on his feet. (Even if that leads him to spew nonsense)
You act as if certain crappy threads bu certain pubs dont sit here too. What the heck. And the question was, what "Christian" has to do with your immigration position? You took a shot at my faith in regards to immigration. I gave you scripture. You gave me nothing. What is Christian about your immigration position? That is the question. I will await your response.
No one said they were immune. YOU said we are unfair. I am asking you to show me the scorecard of deleted posts. Of wait. You can't. They are gone!
Or...or...or, The NL choses a different team to continue the World Series, because of injuries and a terrible showing in game one and The AL team says: nah, we're good.