Someone call Lorne Michaels and see if the old land shark costume is somewhere in deep storage…
Harris, as a woman and a non-Trump, would be at risk of being to a higher standard by the media and public, and criticized for too harsh a comment. Sure, you were joking. Would it work? Dunno.
Harris should just snap her fingers if he gets too close.
Harris should refer to his firehose of bullshit and then say “firehouse” whenever possible.
Harris should just say “loser” and Trump will turn into a hot mess.
Harris should put on a shark suit.
Damn it-Trump is not a comic book villain, and this is no fucking comic book. Are y’all actually thinking Group Trump has not thought about all this (and much more) and prepared for it in a way to appease his troops?
Sometimes I weep in despair at the third grade thinking that goes on here.
He was pretty appalling bad. The fact that Biden wasn’t obviously better than him was enough to doom his candidacy.
The key thing here is he didn’t agree to that debate as he had some incredible insight into Bidens mental state. He thinks he’s an awesome charismatic speaker who everyone will hear who will convince America with his wonderful oratory. He is even more sure of that after the Biden debate, hence why he agreed to these debates IMO
I hopeful Harris will wipe the floor with him and disabuse even Trump of that notion.
Does Trump prepare for anything? Does he rehearse before debates, like any normal person would?
During the trial in N.York, Trump had an assistant who shadowed his every step and constantly handed him printouts from internet sites praising him. The guy needs his ego massaged every 30 minutes. Today, he declared that he had more followers at his rallies than Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” rally.
Have any of his handlers in “Group Trump” ever prepared him to act rationally?
Once more, with feeling.
Trump doesn’t have to be normal or rational. He just has to appeal to his loving masses, and he is doing a great job at that, most of the time. Have you taken a look at one of his rallies and seen what those bozoes cheer at?
All of that kinda goes towards my desire to see Harris goad Trump into mistakes. So far, they have not managed but it seems such an easy and obvious thing to do that I am not sure why it has not been done yet.
Because for it to work, his own followers have to see and acknowledge those mistakes.
True but fuck them. They are mostly a lost cause. We need to sway that middle 20(ish)%.
Yeah but the flip side of that is Harris doesn’t have to actually debate him. You can’t debate him and nothing she can do or say will convince those bozoes not to vote for him. But she doesn’t have to, she just needs to turn up and present an obvious glaring alternative to his incoherent blathering hate. Biden failed to do that. I am confident Harris is up to the task.
Slight correction - see and acknowledge that those were mistakes. They’ll acknowledge his statements with cheers. She would goad him; he would rant; his followers would see that as a strong action against someone improperly picking on him. They go to his rallies; he insults trans women; his followers see that as strong action against someone who ain’t normal. You and I hear him go off topic and think “He’s a loser who can’t answer a question”; his followers hear the same thing and think “That was a bogus question, and he thinks like we do!”
Not sure that his adoring masses are all who he needs to appeal to. Oh sure revving them up is sufficient to keep him in the game, but the impact of the debates, to the degree there is any impact that lasts to the election itself, is based on also not revving up the other side more, and also appealing to those who may or may not vote and who have waited until this debate to pay any attention at all.
His blather is known but her presenting a calm knowledgeable firm case of her positive vision that respects those who voted for him before, in contrast to his dystopian future is key.
I like Kamala’s answer: let’s see how the originally-scheduled one on Sept 10 goes before I agree to another. In other words, forget the Fox News proposal for Sept 4.
Has anybody told Trump yet that “ABC debate” does not mean a contest to see who can remember the alphabet (in order!) without a teleprompter?
Definitely work in plagiarizing Ronnie with “there you go again”.
That … that would be brilliant!
see, this is the problem with debating DT … you need to use your bandwidth and allotted time to debunk him (instead of talking yourself up). So you start at a disadvantage.
IMHO, the best way would have been “Trump said a debate is not necessary as he is well known. so am I - and I agree a debate is not necessary — VOTE HARRIS”.
If you want to put out a fire, you need to deprive it of oxygen … his oxigen is called “MEDIA ATTENTION” … right now he is starved (and suffering) … why change that?
I agree.
It’s a thin line that she’s treading, though. If she goes too hard after his record, policies (such as they are), personality or legal issues, she runs the risk of being labeled as “bitchy, or “shrill” or something other nonsense.
She has to maintain an aggressive tone without overdoing it. It’s a very thin needle she has to thread.
Because she benefits from the media attention possibly more. He is very well known. She is still becoming known. Especially to the group of voters who don’t pay much attention except for things like maybe the first half hour or so of a debate or at least highlights of.
Yes there is a risk. There is some overconfidence expressed here. But not debating would be playing to not lose, rather than to win. Probably not a great idea.