…
The former president said there would be a debate on Fox News on September 4 in Pennsylvania, as well as the previously agreed to September 10 debate on ABC News in Pennsylvania, and a third debate on NBC News on September 25 in Michigan. “Details to follow. I look forward to seeing Kamala at all three Debates!” he wrote.
However, the Harris campaign suggested that this schedule was not agreed to from their side, except for the ABC debate.
“We’re pleased Trump finally agreed to debate the Vice President on ABC after previously trying to back out. We are open to another debate, and we’ll continue those conversations. But to be clear, any additional debate would be subject to Trump actually showing up on September 10. We’re not playing his games,” a Harris campaign aide told Newsweek in a Sunday morning email.
Newsweek - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Newsweek:
MBFC: Right-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.newsweek.com/kamala-harris-campaign-responds-trumps-proposed-debate-schedule-1937561
Surely his own supporters know him well enough to know he would do the Fox debate and then skip the ABC debate, right,? It’s just how he works.
Drumpf’s camp is trying to control the situation and act like they are calling the shots. This is making them look weak and inept. Not the message they want to send.
Trump’s campaign is relying on the Dems taking the high road and going along with it. Good to see the Harris campaign isn’t falling for it, altthough they should have been more clear that they did not agree to the other two.
To get the message across to voters who don’t read into everything they should have said:
“We have only agreed to the one debate on ABC on September 10th. We are open to another debate, and we’ll continue those conversations. But to be clear, any additional debates would be subject to Trump actually showing up on September 10.”
Yes, people can infer that means the Fox News one is a no go since it is prior to Sept 10th, but a good chunk of the population needs that spelled out.
I am so tired of this going high shit. Going high means you don’t understand the urgency.
So happy to see Harris being scrappy and fighting for people. The need is (and was) bigger than any politicians’ dignity.
Doing a debate on Fox is a terrible idea, no matter how good a debater you are.
Fox has kinda started to turn on Trump, so it might not be the worst idea ever.
Have they? Do you have any examples? I’d love to see them talk shit about him
Especially if it’s before the other ones.
He’ll look good on Fox then not do any others.
Hopefully Harris is smart enough to see through this.
My thoughts exactly. His bone spurs will suddenly come back after the fox debate so he can chicken out of the others, or some even lamer excuse.
He’s still going to show up to the Fox “debate,” even though nobody else has agreed to it, and act like Harris “failed to appear.”
“only if we can move the September 10th debate to September 4th”
Considering the campaigns response, I think they are smart enough to see it for what it is.
Bernie and Pete go on there all the time…
It’s not impossible
It would be impossible to have an unbiased moderator there.
deleted by creator
Great post. I truly hope I’m wrong, but I’ve been trying to temper people’s expectations when they seem to be expecting Harris to annihilate Trump in a debate.
She has grown incredibly as a public speaker compared to only a few years ago, so maybe she is getting coaching and is better now.
But like you say, her experience comes from attacking out of a position of authority in a setting that strictly enforces decorum. She has none of that in a debate, and we can expect the moderators to do their usual worst. Trump will give her no respect, will talk (shout, more likely) over her and pay no heed to truth - comfortable with knowing live fact-checking won’t happen.
Her only path to victory is to stare him down and put him in his place on merit and out of a display of personal authority. It’s a very different prospect than being a courtroom prosecutor.
and it would be terrible idea actually doing it before the one orange cheeto is trying to chicken out from. glad to see that harris campaign is not buying it.
Basically Harris needs to plan to have the Fox debate but hold off the decision until after Trump appears on ABC. That way she’s still in the driver’s seat.
If she agrees to the fox debate now, Trump would just not show up because of, um, let’s see…bone spurs were acting up.
And then Trump can shit on Harris for not coming to the Fox debate she agreed to.
It’ll be the only way some people actually watch it. If it goes even halfway decent It’ll be huge. Risky, but maybe worth it
Bernie could do it, but I don’t think Harris can. Maybe I underestimate her.
It will be tough to win over Fox viewers to begin with, and they will stack the deck to make her look terrible. Fill the room with diehard Trump cultists who will eat out of his hand and howl and cheer at his every jab. Prepare the most pointed questions for her and the most soft ball for him, and bring it home with unapologetically biased moderators who will let Trump run rampant.
Unless you have the authority and charisma to completely command the entire room, I only see it ending in disaster.
Bernie did great with the fox town halls
The Faux Entertainment Network has a legitimate journalistic credibility problem. Don’t people know that Fox has lost HUUUGE lawsuits that make them questionable? Wake up sleepy heads! DonOLD needs a skewed playing field to keep lying and grifting you and repulsing the solid message from the VP Harris. He IS a criminal, after all.
From their statement (“any additional debate would be subject to Trump actually showing up on September 10”), it sounds like they’re talking about the NBC debate only, as the proposed FOX debate is scheduled before the original one.
“You didn’t come to my fox pep rally, that we never ran by you in the first place, so I decided not to do the abc debate that had already been negotiated”
