politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Honestly, Harris shouldn't make the same mistakes Biden did and allow her own hubris to get away from her, thinking a debate with Trump would be a cakewalk.
There's a reason why Trump's former opponents have advocated for muted mics. Without them, Trump just starts with his stream of consciousness and just never stops. He doesn't let his opponents get a word in edgewise, shouts down anyone who tries to talk, and completely ignores or outright attacks the moderators themselves. He turns on the firehose of lies in real time and leaves his opponents on the defensive trying to fact-check him.
And while Harris is a seasoned prosecutor, she has always had the benefit of making her arguments in front of judges under very structured conditions where she doesn't have an opponent filling the court record with bullshit and constantly interrupting. She's used to arguing in a courtroom where a judge can and will shut that shit right down the minute an opponent tries to start up, and can bring unruly lawyers to heel under the very real hreat of contempt charges, sanctions, or worse.
There are no such tools available to Harris in a debate. Any moderators are just going to be mocked, ridiculed, and ignored. He can't be threatened into silence under threat of contempt of court. Without muted mics, there's literally nothing stopping him from turning the debate into nothing more than one of his rallies, and I have not seen anything to make me believe she can handle the Trump Hate Machine when it's in her face live and in real time. Harris has done better than I've expected her to so far, but she still seems nervous when making speeches, and I'm not sure she can simply keep up with him.
I understand her point of wanting to open up the mics and actually let Trump dig his own grave for 90 minutes, but that backfired spectacularly on Biden. It's not like he's going to debate her on policy. I will blow a skunk live on Twitter if the man spends more than two minutes actually answering a policy question at all. But even if his entire performance is 90 minutes of an incomprehensible word salad, he's still going to come out as the perceived "winner" if he's able to successfully shout her down whenever she tries to talk, because it'll make Harris look like she can't hang. And I don't believe that if it comes down to an unregulated shouting match (which it will with unmuted mics) that Harris has what it takes to go toe to toe with Trump.
I actually wish it were Walz. Walz would absolutely wipe the floor with Trump if he tried that shit. I'm not 100% confident Harris can do the same, and I'm afraid it could be a major if not fatal setback to the campaign if she can't. It's one thing wanting to let your opponent dig his own grave. But I'm afraid Harris is standing a bit too close to the edge here and may end up leaning too far over and falling in anyway.
Keep the mics muted. Keep Trump off his game when he gets frustrated because he can't speak, isn't getting his way, or is just getting owned. But anyone who's been paying attention should know that giving Trump a live, unregulated mic is a very, very bad idea.
I actually vehemently disagree, here. Remember in 2020 when Biden said, "Will you shut up, man?" It utterly destroyed Trump in one sentence, because it simultaneously revealed him to be a petulant idiot and forced him to actually shut up or prove Biden right about him. Biden won that debate in that moment, without question.
I think Harris sees opportunity in letting Trump be as thoroughly Trump-ish as he wants to be, but with a prosecutor on stage his only audience, rather than a crowd of sycophants.
Trump's schtick only works when left unchallenged.
I agree here, but on the flip side, Biden lost the most recent debate about two minutes into it with the "........we, uh,.....we finally beat medicare!" line. And that was before all the other times Biden stood there looking like a limp, senile old man. Harris making a similar gaffe could be fatal, and if she's unprepared to handle Trump when he's unhinged and uncontrollable, he could cause her to stumble into a gaffe of her own.
Of course. This is exactly what they're seeing. I'm just not as convinced that she could handle it when he does. And make no mistake: I hope I'm wrong. I'm just concerned over what happens if I'm not.
And giving him an open mic is a great way to do that. He cannot be controlled by moderators and there is no other way to get him to shut the fuck up if he decides that just shouting Harris into submission is going to be his strategy. The only thing Trump has done so far to Harris's rise is to launch personal and racist attacks. Do you for one second think Trump is going to give either Harris or the moderators he's also already attacking the respect to stick to the norms of a presidential debate? I wouldn't be putting my money on that. I fully expect Trump to try taking over the entire thing and all but telling the moderators to go fuck themselves if they even attempt to keep him on track (Spoiler alert: They wont, because unhinged Trump = ratings).
Look at how he treated the women at the NABJ interview. And one of those 3 is a Fox News Trump syncophant. And she still got shit on by Trump. You think he's going to give Harris any more respect?
This is what I don't understand because it seems pretty simple to me. If he lies, the moderators step in and correct the record. If he talks over them or Harris, his mic is cut. If he keeps doing it, his time is given to Harris. If he still persists, he's asked to leave.
This is what moderators at every debate Trump has attended has threatened to do. The number of moderators who have been successful in doing so has been exactly zero. Most haven't even bothered to try. Few are willing to actually follow through with threats of moderation, and none have actually been successful.
Megan Kelly, who herself was a Fox News host, tried and the most people remember about her is when Trump basically shut her down, later saying she had "blood coming from her wherever."
The NABJ hosts were completely steamrolled by Trump, again including another Fox News host who Trump kept attacking even when she was trying to defend him.
Jake Tapper and Dana Bash did exactly nothing as Trump ran away with the recent Trump/Biden debate that led to the end of Biden's run.
Kaitlan Collins let the CNN Town Hall turn into a de facto Trump rally.
The moderators have all been spineless cowards, agreed. My point is that it's time to find some who aren't.
Yeah, but unfortunately we're not going to find that in this election cycle. And given Trump's new-found hatred for ABC, I'd be willing to bet that those moderators aren't going to find much success either.
Why not?
Because Trump is not going to cooperate with any moderator unwilling to all but give him a blowie on the air. Or because the media networks don't want the moderators to do their job because unhinged Trump = ratings. Or because the moderators themselves may be worried about death threats if the MAGA base believes they've offended their god-king. Or all of the above.
Either way, there's no chance in hell that Trump participates in a debate with objective moderators willing to do their job.
I guess I don't share your certainly about all things Trump.