Agreed but I’m dreading the post-debate analysis may call it a draw if DJT fails to melt down. If she focuses on explaining her policies or something potentially dull like that I can already see the NYT headline on Wednesday morning - “Harris Fails To Land Knockout Blow On Trump At Debate”.
Or if she goes on the attack there will be talk of her being shrill or some other misogynistic blather.
I think we can count on a NYT headline like that regardless of what occurs.
Sad but true.
I was going to say the same. There’s exactly zero Harris can do about it, so it shouldn’t have weight in deciding what to do, or whether the decision is a good one.
Lots of people seem to be underestimating Kamala’s intelligence and instincts, not to mention charisma. I believe she will be all the things we were hoping for with Biden, but he was too tired to deliver. Kamala is a very smart person, Trump’s protests to the contrary. She will do well and Trump, as always, will look like an idiot.
Trump isn’t going to melt down more than he melts down in his normal appearances in front of the camera. The guy is unhinged and he has succeeded in making crazy gibberish look routine because he does it every time. I don’t think you can expect much more than his usual garbage that we often document in P&E.
I think if Harris looks better, and that’s not only possible but probable, it will help her. There will be no knockout blow in this debate.
Also, significant “sane-washing” by the media. But yeah, he’d have to basically drop a slur or have a stroke on stage for him to “lose” the debate.
I think the debate will boost Harris because she’ll look better in comparison, but not by much. And not as much as it should for reasonably competent vs gibbering wannabe dictator.
Apparently, the latest completely made-up talking point in the right-wing media is that “Haitian gangs” are roaming the streets of America and eating people’s pets.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump brings that one up tomorrow night.
Should Harris make any specific reference to Trump’s coherence, should the opportunity come up? Maybe repeat back exact words incredulously or in confusion?
Wouldn’t surprise me either, but that wouldn’t really fit with what I’m talking about. It’d have to be one of like a half-dozen words I’m not going to type here.
New York Times headline:
Trump Dispalys Unity with Tourette’s Sufferers and Makes Campaign Stop in Hospital
Also, Venezuelan gangs are terrorizing Colorado with weapons which even the military doesn’t see!
I won’t be watching, don’t need to.
Reading the play by play here on the Dope will be more fun.
Is this going to be the “watch” thread or will there be a separate one?
I agree this is likely.
I do not like that there is just one debate. Harris has never been in a general election presidential debate before, while this is the seventh time Trump has done it. I know, learning from mistakes is not one of his strengths. But experience is a plus. I think if Trump and Harris had the normal series of three debates, she would be seen have gotten better over time.
Absolutely. And I doubt a slur by itself would do it. He’s the one who brought up “shithole countries” before (admittedly not in a debate), and it made absolutely no difference.
I said it about the last debate, and I’ll say it about this one - I don’t think it’s possible to “win” a Presidential debate in any manner that will affect the race, but I think it’s absolutely possible to lose one badly enough to do so. Hence, a stroke or some other undeniable sign of infirmity.
The taboo against n***** or k*** is orders of magnitude higher than “shithole countries” which was basically zero. I don’t expect we’ll get the situation to see if I’m right, so it’s all speculation.
I think that could be effective, if done properly—i.e., not in a mocking way, more in a “for real, did we all just hear that?” way.
My guess is that Trump will lose and that Harris, even if slightly ahead after the debate, will not be ahead enough to sit on a lead. So they both would have a reason to debate again.
I do not understand why the Harris campaign didn’t push for the normal three debates, instead of, or in addition to, its hopeless attempt to dictate to a television network how they will run the microphones.
I don’t have a strong preference. What do you think?