CHRIS CRUCIAL: Why Donald needs a debate 🗣️

PLUS: Cori Bush loses

Welcome to Chris Crucial. Check out my mission statement on why you should invest in me. It’s $6 a month/$60 for the year to become a paid subscriber! Do it today!👇

1. ISO: A Debate

Less than a week ago, Donald Trump said that he would debate Vice President Kamala Harris on Fox News on September 4.

Now, well, he’s more flexible.

In an interview with Fox News (natch!) on Wednesday, Trump seemed open to other possible debates on other possible networks.

“I'd like to see it on FOX, by the way,” said Trump. “I would like to see it -- my preference would be FOX, but we have to debate.”

Later in that same interview he added:

She doesn't to debate. Look, she doesn't want to debate. She wants to say I don't want to debate, but I do want to debate….

…And you know, pretty much, that's the way I'd do it right now, because I want to debate her. I think it's important for the country that we debate.

When dealing with Trump, it’s always safe to assume that what he says the other candidate wants/needs is actually what he wants/needs.

And that is very much the case here.

Consider the trajectories of the two campaigns over the last 3 weeks.

Before Joe Biden dropped out on July 21, Trump was rapidly trending upward — nationally and in swing states.

Since Harris got into the race, however, that trend line for Trump has turned in the opposite direction. The streams, as they say, have crossed.

Here’s the New York Times polling average of the Harris-Trump matchup:

Trump’s poll numbers haven’t cratered. The race is still very close — nationally and in swing states.

But, campaigns are about momentum. Trend lines. Arrows up and arrows down. And right now, the Trump arrow is down and the Harris arrow is up.

Trump knows that. He is nothing if not a savvy analyst of public sentiment. And he also knows that in order to change the trend lines, he needs a shake up in the race. A way to break Harris’ current momentum.

That can, of course, come in the form of some sort of deus ex machina — a major flub by Harris, a damaging media story etc. But, Trump isn’t a patient man. And he doesn’t want to just wait for some sort of confluence of external events to change things. He wants to take matters into his own hands.

Which is why he wants — and really needs — to find a way to debate Harris at least once.

Trump, of course, literally admitted that reality in the Fox News interview on Wednesday. (If you listen to him long enough, he always just says the quiet part out loud.)

“I think debates are very important, and I think she'll be exposed just like Biden was exposed,” Trump said. “Nobody knew Biden was that bad, and then he was exposed during the debate, and they tried to have a series of comebacks after that, and they didn’t work out too well, and they viciously overthrew him.”

The key word in that quote is “exposed.” Trump believes that Harris has gotten a free pass — especially from the media — to date. (He’s not wrong!) And that the way to end the honeymoon stage of the Harris candidacy is to get on stage with her and make her answer for her record — and the flip flops she had performed on some of her past policy proposals since becoming the nominee.

What this all means is that Harris holds the leverage in the debate negotiations. Which is not a place that Trump, who fashions himself a world-renowned negotiator, likes to be.

That isn’t to say that Harris doesn’t want to debate Trump. Standing on stage with the former president — and, Democrats hope, staring him down rhetorically and literally — could well help undecided voters see her as someone who could occupy the Oval Office in a way that few other things the vice president does might.

All of this is to say: I would be surprised if there wasn’t at least one debate between now and November 5. Trump needs it. And Harris wants it.

2. Cori Bush (and the Squad) lose

Missouri Rep. Cori Bush became only the 2nd Democrat to lose a primary this year, falling to St. Louis County prosector Wesley Bell by 5 points on Tuesday night.

It was another defeat for the so-called “Squad,” a group of high-profile liberal members of the House. Earlier this summer, New York Rep. Jamaal Bowman lost badly in a primary fight of his own.

The defeats of Bush and Bowman bore a number of similarities. In both instances, the relatively junior members had drawn national headlines for their criticism of Israel and calls for a ceasefire in the Middle East. And, in both races, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee spent millions of dollars to defeat them. In the Missouri race, a super PAC affiliated with the group spent upwards of $8 million; in the Bowman race, AIPAC spent $15 million.

In her concession speech on Tuesday, Bush took direct aim at AIPAC, saying:

“They’re about to see this other Cori, this other side. There is nothing that happens in my life that happens in vain. So, this happened because it was meant to happen. And let me say, it’s because of the work that I need to do. And let me say this: AIPAC, I’m coming to tear your kingdom down!”

Which, wowza!

In neither case — Bowman or Bush — is the seat in jeopardy for the party in the fall as both districts heavily favor Democrats.

What’s clear, however, is that AIPAC puts its money where its mouth is. Cross them on the Middle East and you may well pay a major political price.

The broader question, of course, is what this means for the Democratic party. Beginning in 2020 — with the murder of George Floyd — the party clearly moved to the ideological left, elevating voices like Bush and Bowman who might have been considered “too extreme” even a few years before.

Following Bowman’s defeat, Jay Jacobs, the chairman of the New York Democratic Party, told the Associated Press that it was “a clear indication that the Democratic Party has moved toward wanting common sense solutions, common sense governance and wants to favor those candidates, rather than those from the extreme.”

So, is the pendulum now swinging back to the middle? And what does that mean for the 2024 presidential election? Stay tuned!

3. Me and Chuck!

I have known NBC’s Chuck Todd for more than two decades. (We are old!) I have talked politics with him innumerable times over those years.

But, we almost never record it!

This time we did. Chuck and I chatted about Tim Walz, how the presidential race has fundamentally changed in the space of three weeks and threw in a little media criticism too. It was good times. Check it out!

NOTABLE QUOTABLE

“We don't know who the vice presidential nominee is going to be.” — JD Vance TODAY in Wisconsin.

ONE GOOD CHART

Simone Biles is 27. Rebecca Andrade is 25. And they won gold and silver in the Olympics gymnastics all-around competition. Which is a change! This Washington Post piece on the success of “older” female gymnasts is terrific.

SONG OF THE DAY

On this day in 1994, Garth Brooks played a concert in front of just less than 1 million people in Central Park. Here’s his best song: “Friends in Low Places.”

Thanks for reading! This nightly newsletter brings you ALL of what you need to know from the world of politics. Think of it as a daily cheat sheet! If you want to get it in your email inbox every night at 7:30 pm, become a subscriber today!