There has never been a candidate this unfit, morally, temperamentally, or intellectually, at least not in last 100 years. And yet journalists still discuss Trump as if he were FDR or LBJ or even Abraham Lincoln.
On the most basic level we are once again witnessing the behavior of a bully. Pick on, attack and taunt the weak and vulnerable (Biden), go after with wants, bluster, and threats the perceived weak and vulnerable (Harris), get beat up, and avoid that individual through lies, excuses, bluster, and ersatz nonchalance so as not to lose face (ie, cling to power).
Chris, you left out the part of the story where Trump refused to debate his GOP challengers, claiming that he was already the presumptive nominee and thus didn't need to. I think we know the real reason he didn't want to debate that field was that he was afraid they might gang up on him and loosen his hold on his base. So he refused to debate, and it worked for him. He's only anxious to debate when he 'knows' that he will win. After having his butt handed to him by Harris, that confidence is gone, regardless of what he says publicly. So, I expect him to continue to claim that he doesn't need to debate again because he already won 🤣🤣🤣.
If Harris pulls even a few points ahead after this debate, won't Trump almost be forced to beg for another debate to try to do something to halt her momentum? But if that happens, wouldn't it be in her best interests to pass?
I may be in the minority, but I think Harris SHOULD debate Trump on Fox News, with an audience. That way, she can kick his butt and there would be NO excuse left for Trump to say a debate is fixed. And she would look brave in everyone's eyes.
While she would definitely look brave, I think it would be tremendously difficult for her to debate under those circumstances: I can see everyone in the audience constantly booing her and that reaction to her attempts to speak would be unnerving to anyone. On the other hand, I suppose if she chose to do it, she would probably know ahead of time that that would be highly likely, so who knows? lol
Trump's whole thing is he has to look like a strongman, so wouldn't ducking out of a debate after getting his butt kicked make him look like a huge p-word? Does he really want that to be his lasting image?
I think if you're Trump, you have to agree to another debate and just try to do the teleprompter Trump I don't wanna be here stuff and just stick to that one talking point he used in his closing statement.
Your lasting image comment is bang on Sam. (is Trump sophisticated to realize this? - good question :-) )
Frank Luntz, veteran GOP pollster agrees with you... The debate had shown “Trump at his absolute worst”, and Luntz said Trump had “no choice” but to seek another televised showdown .... "He has to recover. He has to give people a reason not to see this as his defining moment.” (as reported in the Financial Times)
I don't think Harris needs another debate with Trump. Harris has already shown that she is not only able to stand Toe to Toe with the Cult leader, she's also mightily superior to him in every way, intellectually, morally you name it ( contrary to some Pundits' insinuations).
I had thought yes at first - I mean the first one was so entertaining. But then I read some comments that Chris Christie had (not that I am usually a fan) and I agree with him. She did well. The only thing that could happen is Trump looks better. That being said, I think an in depth interview would be better for her. I know people who keep saying to me I want more details. A debate will not satisfy people who want details.
I don’t get the “I need more details on Kamala” voters. She and her campaign have articulated a number of plans with details. What plan specifics have Trump and campaign offered? The few big things (round up immigrants, massive tariffs, etc.), are awful/ridiculous.
To me these people come off as closeted Trump voters.
I need more details, Joseph. (1) We already live in an "opportunity economy". I'd rather hear how US workers (that want upward mobility) should adapt to the forthcoming economy built on AI, cybersecurity, and alternative energy. The required skills can be acquired through certification and/or community colleges. Those educations will pay for themselves with interest-free government loans. Don't buy us stuff neither of us can afford. (2) If Trump's tariffs are so misguided, why didn't the Biden admin lift them? She totally dodged this question. The tariffs exposed that China's economy was much weaker than China wanted us to believe. Yes, small businesses hate the tariffs but farmers are now starting to see the strategy pay off. US consumers are still buying stuff. It shows that there is some wisdom to playing hardball and not just accepting free trade principles when other economies try to undermine us. (3) The border is a mess. I think we can all agree on that. Waiting too long to curb asylum and get the bipartisan border bill through were epic fails for public opinion. When rounding up immigrants is more popular than your position on immigration, you need to give more details. (4) What is she going to do about the wars? She has said nothing to distinguish herself from the Biden admin. She supports Israel defending itself and peace/protection for Gaza's citizens, but won't go further than denouncing violence against civilians.
Two key counterpoints: economists’ feedback is that Trump’s proposed tariffs would be a big price hit to US consumers. Trump killed the bipartisan border bill. That ain’t on Biden / Harris.
Americans are greedy AF when it comes to buying stuff. We complain about not being able to afford all the stuff we want when the working class of the countries we buy it from can’t afford any of the stuff we buy. What’s the estimated cost per family for Trump’s additional tariffs? $2000 I think? The workers in China or South Asia that made that stuff probably don’t make that much money in 3 months. I agree with those that believe Trump’s wrong about tariffs bringing jobs back to America and I think Americans should look to new sectors for jobs besides manufacturing anyway. Still, Trump also wanted to hurt China’s economy (and thus ambitions) with the tariffs and that is working. That’s why the democrats pivoted and started supporting them. Trump is an idiot, but he does seem to be genuinely pissed that China is getting rich off of US consumers.
Short answer on the 2nd point. Both parties should have pushed that immigration bill through loooong before Trump was the nominee and had so much leverage to sink it. Biden/Harris sat on immigration for years. Trump oversells the border czar BS but it’s true Harris did very little with border policy because her office was in disarray.
I agree with you and have said as much, BUT, what came back is what specifically will you do on immigration. What specifically will you do on the Israel issue. I know Josh Shapiro yesterday had some great comments but as someone pointed out she never gave the specifics, he was giving them. What will she do about the rampant antisemitism?
I don't see the point of another debate - wouldn't it basically be a rehash? Attacks aside - what new substantive idea could we possibly hear? I doubt Harris has anything up her sleeve that she wanted to, but didn't, announce - and Trump hasn't had a substantive idea since 1981.
Here's my thought, would appreciate input if doable, both pro or con from Chris and So What subscribers. Revised debate format. 4-6 Moderator panel, split between conservative and liberal, newspaper and tv journalists. Debate covers 4-6 key issues/ topics, 90-120 minutes length. Format: Candidate 1 responds to issue. 2-3 moderators ask follow up questions. Candidate 1 replies. Candidate 2 responds to issue and Candidate 1. 2-3 Moderators ask follow up questions. Canidate 1 briefly responds to Candidate 2. Then on to next key issue or topic. Advantages: More in-depth information provided by candidates, they can be fact checked, they can be better held accountable to answer questions and address the issue or topic. A win for the American voter.
Good analysis Chris, but I say, Trump will debate Harris again. All he needs to hear is that he is AFRAID to debate her, that he appears WEAK in refusing to debate her, and he will readjust his 3-ft red silk tie and be there.
There will ultimately be another debate if for no other reason than Donald Trump can’t resist being on TV in front of millions of people, even if doing so isn’t in his best interests. There will, however, be the usual hemming and hawing and saying that he won’t and doesn’t need to before he finally does.
Trump represents a group of Americans who aren’t going to care about a debate. Independents who still haven’t made up their mind after Trump’s dog’s breakfast aren’t really independents. Seeking more endorsements from popular culture icons is a better way to win any remaining folks. 100,000 Americans didn’t vote in 2020. Who are these people?
Oh, please! He is out there, everywhere, blaming ABC and roaring for them to lose their broadcasting license and be prosecuted for election interference.
I hope there will be a second debate so that she can trounce him again.
More importantly, I hope people are paying careful attention!
There has never been a candidate this unfit, morally, temperamentally, or intellectually, at least not in last 100 years. And yet journalists still discuss Trump as if he were FDR or LBJ or even Abraham Lincoln.
Some journalists worship him and try to hide it
Trump’s whole act “jumped the shark “ last night.
On the most basic level we are once again witnessing the behavior of a bully. Pick on, attack and taunt the weak and vulnerable (Biden), go after with wants, bluster, and threats the perceived weak and vulnerable (Harris), get beat up, and avoid that individual through lies, excuses, bluster, and ersatz nonchalance so as not to lose face (ie, cling to power).
Exactly!
Chris, you left out the part of the story where Trump refused to debate his GOP challengers, claiming that he was already the presumptive nominee and thus didn't need to. I think we know the real reason he didn't want to debate that field was that he was afraid they might gang up on him and loosen his hold on his base. So he refused to debate, and it worked for him. He's only anxious to debate when he 'knows' that he will win. After having his butt handed to him by Harris, that confidence is gone, regardless of what he says publicly. So, I expect him to continue to claim that he doesn't need to debate again because he already won 🤣🤣🤣.
I agree.
If Harris pulls even a few points ahead after this debate, won't Trump almost be forced to beg for another debate to try to do something to halt her momentum? But if that happens, wouldn't it be in her best interests to pass?
Yes, I'm really interested what the post-debate poll numbers will be. (Not the numbers Trump was making up in the spin room.)
I may be in the minority, but I think Harris SHOULD debate Trump on Fox News, with an audience. That way, she can kick his butt and there would be NO excuse left for Trump to say a debate is fixed. And she would look brave in everyone's eyes.
While she would definitely look brave, I think it would be tremendously difficult for her to debate under those circumstances: I can see everyone in the audience constantly booing her and that reaction to her attempts to speak would be unnerving to anyone. On the other hand, I suppose if she chose to do it, she would probably know ahead of time that that would be highly likely, so who knows? lol
Trump's whole thing is he has to look like a strongman, so wouldn't ducking out of a debate after getting his butt kicked make him look like a huge p-word? Does he really want that to be his lasting image?
I think if you're Trump, you have to agree to another debate and just try to do the teleprompter Trump I don't wanna be here stuff and just stick to that one talking point he used in his closing statement.
Will he? Probably not, but there you go.
Sam that's smart thinking. His ego may not let him just lt it sit out there that he lost the first debate.
Your lasting image comment is bang on Sam. (is Trump sophisticated to realize this? - good question :-) )
Frank Luntz, veteran GOP pollster agrees with you... The debate had shown “Trump at his absolute worst”, and Luntz said Trump had “no choice” but to seek another televised showdown .... "He has to recover. He has to give people a reason not to see this as his defining moment.” (as reported in the Financial Times)
I don't think Harris needs another debate with Trump. Harris has already shown that she is not only able to stand Toe to Toe with the Cult leader, she's also mightily superior to him in every way, intellectually, morally you name it ( contrary to some Pundits' insinuations).
💯!
I had thought yes at first - I mean the first one was so entertaining. But then I read some comments that Chris Christie had (not that I am usually a fan) and I agree with him. She did well. The only thing that could happen is Trump looks better. That being said, I think an in depth interview would be better for her. I know people who keep saying to me I want more details. A debate will not satisfy people who want details.
I don’t get the “I need more details on Kamala” voters. She and her campaign have articulated a number of plans with details. What plan specifics have Trump and campaign offered? The few big things (round up immigrants, massive tariffs, etc.), are awful/ridiculous.
To me these people come off as closeted Trump voters.
I would love to see her do a town hall situation on one of the networks! She could really get info out in that setting!
I need more details, Joseph. (1) We already live in an "opportunity economy". I'd rather hear how US workers (that want upward mobility) should adapt to the forthcoming economy built on AI, cybersecurity, and alternative energy. The required skills can be acquired through certification and/or community colleges. Those educations will pay for themselves with interest-free government loans. Don't buy us stuff neither of us can afford. (2) If Trump's tariffs are so misguided, why didn't the Biden admin lift them? She totally dodged this question. The tariffs exposed that China's economy was much weaker than China wanted us to believe. Yes, small businesses hate the tariffs but farmers are now starting to see the strategy pay off. US consumers are still buying stuff. It shows that there is some wisdom to playing hardball and not just accepting free trade principles when other economies try to undermine us. (3) The border is a mess. I think we can all agree on that. Waiting too long to curb asylum and get the bipartisan border bill through were epic fails for public opinion. When rounding up immigrants is more popular than your position on immigration, you need to give more details. (4) What is she going to do about the wars? She has said nothing to distinguish herself from the Biden admin. She supports Israel defending itself and peace/protection for Gaza's citizens, but won't go further than denouncing violence against civilians.
Two key counterpoints: economists’ feedback is that Trump’s proposed tariffs would be a big price hit to US consumers. Trump killed the bipartisan border bill. That ain’t on Biden / Harris.
Americans are greedy AF when it comes to buying stuff. We complain about not being able to afford all the stuff we want when the working class of the countries we buy it from can’t afford any of the stuff we buy. What’s the estimated cost per family for Trump’s additional tariffs? $2000 I think? The workers in China or South Asia that made that stuff probably don’t make that much money in 3 months. I agree with those that believe Trump’s wrong about tariffs bringing jobs back to America and I think Americans should look to new sectors for jobs besides manufacturing anyway. Still, Trump also wanted to hurt China’s economy (and thus ambitions) with the tariffs and that is working. That’s why the democrats pivoted and started supporting them. Trump is an idiot, but he does seem to be genuinely pissed that China is getting rich off of US consumers.
Short answer on the 2nd point. Both parties should have pushed that immigration bill through loooong before Trump was the nominee and had so much leverage to sink it. Biden/Harris sat on immigration for years. Trump oversells the border czar BS but it’s true Harris did very little with border policy because her office was in disarray.
I agree with you and have said as much, BUT, what came back is what specifically will you do on immigration. What specifically will you do on the Israel issue. I know Josh Shapiro yesterday had some great comments but as someone pointed out she never gave the specifics, he was giving them. What will she do about the rampant antisemitism?
Agreed.
I don't see the point of another debate - wouldn't it basically be a rehash? Attacks aside - what new substantive idea could we possibly hear? I doubt Harris has anything up her sleeve that she wanted to, but didn't, announce - and Trump hasn't had a substantive idea since 1981.
Here's my thought, would appreciate input if doable, both pro or con from Chris and So What subscribers. Revised debate format. 4-6 Moderator panel, split between conservative and liberal, newspaper and tv journalists. Debate covers 4-6 key issues/ topics, 90-120 minutes length. Format: Candidate 1 responds to issue. 2-3 moderators ask follow up questions. Candidate 1 replies. Candidate 2 responds to issue and Candidate 1. 2-3 Moderators ask follow up questions. Canidate 1 briefly responds to Candidate 2. Then on to next key issue or topic. Advantages: More in-depth information provided by candidates, they can be fact checked, they can be better held accountable to answer questions and address the issue or topic. A win for the American voter.
What about the potential public perception that he’s scared to debate her again? Will that entice him? He hates to appear weak or afraid!
Good analysis Chris, but I say, Trump will debate Harris again. All he needs to hear is that he is AFRAID to debate her, that he appears WEAK in refusing to debate her, and he will readjust his 3-ft red silk tie and be there.
There will ultimately be another debate if for no other reason than Donald Trump can’t resist being on TV in front of millions of people, even if doing so isn’t in his best interests. There will, however, be the usual hemming and hawing and saying that he won’t and doesn’t need to before he finally does.
Trump represents a group of Americans who aren’t going to care about a debate. Independents who still haven’t made up their mind after Trump’s dog’s breakfast aren’t really independents. Seeking more endorsements from popular culture icons is a better way to win any remaining folks. 100,000 Americans didn’t vote in 2020. Who are these people?
Oh, please! He is out there, everywhere, blaming ABC and roaring for them to lose their broadcasting license and be prosecuted for election interference.
I hope there will be a second debate so that she can trounce him again.
More importantly, I hope people are paying careful attention!