Harris should debate Trump anywhere he wants

[Pototan]

and under any circumstances he desires. Live audience, pick the moderator and news outlet. Fox would be fine with me.

I think Trump is so overmatched against Harris, she'll make a fool out of him regardless of where, when or who moderates.

Harris would win a debate against Trump even if it was at Mar-a-Lago and Eric and Trump Jr. asked the questions. Harris just needs to get the orange asshole on live TV and at a podium within 10 feet.

[RandySF]

1. No

Fox News is a trap.

[Dorian Gray]

9. Having

just seen the awful movie Trap, this made me laugh.

[North Shore Chicago]

13. How was the movie?

Shyamalan movies are fantastic! And now his daughter is following in his footsteps.

[Dorian Gray]

87. Subjectively

it was terrible.

[North Shore Chicago]

88. Thank you, bummer. n/t

[myohmy2]

16. +1...

...I agree...

...there's never going to be a real debate with the lying trump only wild out-of-control staged propaganda events...

...trump should not be allowed to have sole control over the time place or any aspect of this circus debate...

...debate...

[wnylib]

78. It would become a televised MAGA rally instead of a debate.

There is no point in giving the orange weirdo that kind of forum. Also, no point in treating Fox like a legitimate news agency.

[Cha]

80. I was just getting on to Disagree. TSF is not the Boss.. he does

it on Kamala's Terms that have already been agreed to.

[no_hypocrisy]

2. Nope. FOX is 1,000% behind Trump.

There will be hidden landmines such as Harris' mike softened or barely audible. The "moderators" will have two sets of questions, softball inquiries for Trump and loaded questions for Harris.* No fact-checking. No follow-up questions. Talking over Harris. Trump shadowing Harris like he did with Hillary.

Nope. Just nope.

* A loaded question is a form of complex question that contains a controversial assumption (e.g., a presumption of guilt). Example: Why did you fail as "Border Czar" and allow this country to be flooded with illegal immigrants?

[Pototan]

6. It doesn't matter

some of Trump's most memorable and destructive quotes come from soft ball interviews, like Sean Hannity and "I'll be a dictator on day one." He can't help himself.

All you have to do is get this piece of shit in front of a microphone and ask him anything. I'm not saying we can't adjust the ground rules, like having candidates ask each other questions. Under those circumstances, what difference does the moderator make or what network it's on?

[wnylib]

82. Waste of VP Harris' time. She can get all the BS from Trump's mouth that

she needs for campaign ads just from his rallies.

It's a far smarter decision for Harris to stay with ABC's agreement to save the original time and date for either or both qualifying candidates who show up. On ABC, Harris will reach Independents and undecideds. On Fox she would only be watched by committed Trump supporters.

[getagrip_already]

34. Agree 100%, it will be a gang attack

And in the end tsf will get 90% of the stick time. Kamala will get spoken over during her answers, interupted, argued with, false fact checked, and lied about.

Tsf will just get to drone on and on with no chance for her to refute his answers because they will shift topics quickly to something else.

They will call him mr president, and her mrs harris (and yes i know that isnt her name)..

We dont need that crap.

[Sugarcoated]

3. Yeah

Um, no.

[Liberal In Texas]

4. How do you debate a Gish Galloping talking point changer who won't stop to let

a person correct the lies? I won't be a debate. It'll be Harris trying to get in a word in between the nasty sneering vindictive nonsense that he spews. Mostly it'll end up being a cacophony with little understanding of what anybody is saying. Like a Fox Newschannel interview.

We don't need a "debate."

[helpisontheway]

5. No! Nt

[Emile]

7. Let the little crybaby have his way. You kidding, let him cry as he falls further down in the polls.

[Dorian Gray]

8. I honestly

don't think Bret Baier would be "in the bag" for Trump, either. I'm not as familiar with Martha MacCallum, so I can't speak to her.

A Fox live audience is my only concern.... how would they bring people in?

[durablend]

19. Um, the front door?

You can bet they'll be sure to have hecklers

[doc03]

10. Who is he to dictate the terms of a debate. No way she should go on Faux, it is

not a legitimate news network.

[Vinca]

11. I disagree. Trump wants a rally, not a debate. Fox if she can choose the moderators. No audience.

[Dan]

12. No

Fox would stack the audience with pro-Trump MAGA people who would disrupt every time KH says something and would holler with joy when Trump says something.

Then there would be the constant replays of selected segments of Trump’s wonderful moments, and endless replays of KH’s remarks that were not perfect. Plus, I would not put it pass FOX to edit the clips to Trump’s advantage.

There would be no fact checking so he would lie - and thats to promote his propaganda to his audience which Fox is trying to recapture.

No, and hell no.

[617Blue]

14. Nope.

[Irish_Dem]

15. No way.

[gab13by13]

17. Why not debate at Mar-el- Loco

With Beavis and Butthead as moderators?

Not a good idea at all.

[Pototan]

18. That's called hyperbole

The point is that if Kamala gets Trump on stage, she'll make minced meat out of him.

He can't even do an interview with Sean Hannity without fucking up.

[gab13by13]

23. Did you read the reasons why going to Fox is a horrible idea?

TSF will get the questions ahead of time
The audience will be filled with Magats
The moderators will only interrupt and fact check Kamala.
Even if Kamala was winning a topic the moderator would cut off the topic and move to the next.

This is Fox May as well be held at Mar-el-Loco.

[NYC Liberal]

20. Trump should debate Harris anywhere she wants.

Why is it that we have to give into their terms? It’s not about whether Harris could do well in a Fox-hosted debate; no doubt she could. It’s about looking weak. There’s an agreement in place, Trump says “I’m changing the terms” and Harris just says “Yes, sir”? Nah. Why does he get to do that unilaterally?

[GoCubsGo]

21. Hell no. What he's proposing isn't even a debate.

It's a fucking Trump rally, but with him getting to bully his opponent in front of a massive audience. And, anyone who thinks the Propaganda Channel "moderators" will do anything other than facilitate Trump's bullying is deluded. She won't even be given a chance to make her case. You're agreeing to allowing the cheater to dictate the rules. That's just nuts.

[servermsh]

22. This is profoundly wrong

All questions would be fake attacks on Kamala. They would fact check her but not Trump. The audience would be filled with GOP operatives applauding Trump.

What a spectacularly ridiculous suggestion.

[lark]

24. Nope, why should he get to set the stage?

Nope, nope,nope. He can have his own "love fest" on Faux and she can have a townhall at ABC. Letting him set the terms is the totally wrong thing for her to acquiesce to, she's not the lesser here and should 100% not agree. They would stack the audience with asshat magats only, it's totally a ploy! Just say no, Donald, there is an agreement and if you are afraid of it, that's on you. I'm keeping the terms to what was originally set.

[bigtree]

25. no

...anywhere SHE wants.

[spanone]

26. Why should he dictate the terms?

Bullshit.

[atreides1]

27. Not only NO!!!

But fuck NO!!!

[pwb]

28. I can't agree with the fox appearance part.

They would allow lies and rambling from trump. No.

[lapfog_1]

29. F that shit.

No way. The moderators would be in the bag for Trump... and they will ask questions to Kamala like "So when did you decide to let 10 million illegal immigrants into the USA? Is it because you are an illegal immigrant too? Why did senile Joe Biden make you the border czar? Why have you covered up Joe's senility for 3 and a half years?"

Fuck Fox. She is doing just fine right now without a debate.

[newdeal2]

30. She should continue with ABC

If he doesn’t show up, that will be a powerful statement. But I’m betting that he does even if he whines a lot.

[CrispyQ]

31. No. He's acting like he's president & has the right to demand whatever he wants, but he isn't & doesn't.

She can agree to debate if she wants to but she should have her own demands, too. Personally, I would agree to all of it except Fox. I would say if you don't want ABC then pick NBC or CBS but no Fox. NBC loves him. IDK why he doesn't pick them with Kristen Welker & Katy Tur as mods.

[Buns_of_Fire]

32. Response from the Harris campaign: (Silence)

Which is the correct response to Rump's attempt to set up an indoor rally where he might not get shot at by one of his own people.

I've read that, since she's a prosecutor, she'd make shredded bacon out of him. In a courtroom, where a judge controls the trial, can direct the witness to answer the friggin' question, and can hobble a Gish Gallop just like that, definitely so. In a Fox studio, packed with Rump cheerleaders, with "moderators" who are already disposed to adore him, not so much.

[Docreed2003]

33. Nope...sorry

Agreeing to Trump's demands only allows him to control the media messaging. He is scared shitless to meet her on an actual debate stage and debate format, so he came up with a convoluted plan to back out of the ABC debate and created a Fox debate out of thin air as a means to say "See, I'm not scared". We can't allow the asshole to control the message. VP Harris should say "The ABC debate was what was previously agreed upon. I will be at that debate, with or without Donald".

[Carlitos Brigante]

35. Fuuuuuck him. He decides nothing. He doesn't get to call shit. Either he sticks to the

previous agreements or he can go on Mike Pillow's show and debate a cardboard cutout of her.

[liberal N proud]

36. FOX has something planned and should not be trusted

They are planning on something that will elevate trump and embarrass Harris.

No one should ever agree to interview with them or give them control of a debate

[Hekate]

37. No. Not on his own ground; never again

[BlueInPhilly]

38. Hell NO

Kamala can own the stage at ABC and TSF can stew on Fox.

[Kali999]

39. fake president and faux news

Yes screw that. It's stupid. They don't deserve it.

[wryter2000]

60. Welcome to DU

[arlyellowdog]

40. No

I saw Trump’s mommy (some male Fox star) Fox new tell little Danny, “Here’s the scam.” Don’t worry little Danny. That guy has been let out of any situation he’s ever been in. Harris should call him out on his cowardry.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

41. I disagree

Kamala Harris should stick to the agreed to debate with no Fox News studio audience

[Firestorm49]

42. Maybe she should, but right now we're watching a chess game being played out. I applaud her.

No matter where the venue is, she will chew him up and spit him out. The old fool can’t help but stuff his enormous foot in his mouth. This will be one of the best comedy shows of the year and will firmly solidify our positions on the future of our country.

[Gaytano70]

43. Nope.

If debates were actually debates, maybe, but they descend into platforms for sick fuckos to spew a bunch of lies. Audiences only create a Jerry Springer atmosphere when the sick fucko is involved.

[gulliver]

44. Maybe if Jessica Tarlov were one of the moderators

I expect Harris will handle this little move by Trump exceptionally well. She's already responding, and it's great.

[edisdead]

45. Fuck that.

[TheKentuckian]

46. I wish we could consider some of the stages of existence

between cowering in a corner crying and damn the torpedoes!!!

Why are petrified and utterly without discretion and wreckless the only available positions?

[WiVoter]

47. They could split the difference

One moderator from ABC, one from Faux! Or one from ABC, one from CBS; one from Faux, one from Newsmax.

[orthoclad]

49. Why do we use corporate media?

They've normalized this.

[WiVoter]

70. Or They Choose the place. We Choise The Moderators?

[orthoclad]

48. Nope. Choose the ground. Think Gettysburg.

Preferably not ANY Corporate Media, but particularly not Covfefe News.

League of women voters, as in the past?

[ZonkerHarris]

50. Do you give a tantruming toddler everything he wants too? no

[Kingofalldems]

51. With Fox Trump will know the questions beforehand.

[VMA131Marine]

52. No!

Just no!

Why on earth do you think that’s a good idea? I think Kamala should just do a bunch of town halls. She’ll have a much easier time getting her message across without all the inevitable ridiculous spin that comes in the aftermath of a debate.

[polichick]

53. Never appease a bully, a con man or a malignant narcissist...

Or, in this case, the Creep Trifecta.

[madaboutharry]

54. Why give that bully any power?

Fuck him.

[Skittles]

55. NO

NEVER BACK DOWN TO A FUCKING BULLY

sets a bad precedent watching that fascist POS calling the shots

KEEP HIS BACK AGAINST THE WALL

[Ocelot II]

56. Absolutely not.

[wryter2000]

57. No, make him stick to what he agreed to

Don't let him set up something that will, in essence, be a MAGAt rally.

[obnoxiousdrunk]

58. No.

[maptap22]

59. No no no

That would be legitimizing Fox as a credible news source and it is not!

[mcar]

61. No.

Trump should debate Harris on the agreed upon date and any others mutually agreed upon.

[ZZenith]

62. Strongly disagree.

de·bate
/dəˈbāt/
noun
a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.

There would be nothing “formal” about a Fox News debate and they would rig it so she came off poorly and he appeared powerful. It’s an utterly absurd idea to agree to debate him on an “entertainment” channel.

[greatauntoftriplets]

63. Hell no.

She should not give in to his demands, especially because he wants an audience that supports him.

[happy feet]

64. No

Rules are rules. The debate is Sept 10? or NOT.

He's pulling a power move to pull her into his playground at Fox where the refs are on his side. Now, I don't care what happens after the official debate, but if he doesn't show up Kamala gets the entire time for herself --- while he foolishly watches from his golden gilded toilet.

I've never understood why people feel Donald Trump should always get to break and remake the rules --- why we're in the mess we're in now.

[John Shaft]

65. Bags of shit don't give orders to Vice Presidents

He's a nobody, he's beneath shit. He doesn't get to call shots with his convicted felon ass.

[louslobbs]

66. Nope....never let the bully call the

Shots! EVER!

[Scruffy1]

67. No Way.

The CNN format was designed to favor bombast and bullshit. No fact checking and not enough time to refute the lies and talk about policy. Whoever decided to do it should be gone. Brsides why would any sane Democrat give the Murdoch's a dime. These debates are big money makers and they will probably donate it all to the R's.

[Scrivener7]

68. Not on Fox.

[Quixote1818]

69. She could allow him any rules he wants for one and she does one with any rules she wants. nt

[Retrograde]

71. No way - it just opens the door to more demands from the big baby

Harris has already agreed to the terms and conditions of a debate. Trump is afraid to be on anything resembling fair ground, so he is going to keep changing the parameters until he gets a crowd of admiring toadies. It's way past time to give in to his whims and tantrums (it was way past time when he was five years old, for that matter) and if the pandering press wants to spin this as Harris being unreasonable, well, they're already doing that.

If Donnie or his surrogates at the NYT push this, Harris's campaign needs to reply that she's already carved out time in her busy schedule and if Donnie can't make it, tough.

[Doodley]

72. Fox is Trump's propaganda department. Remember, Fox had to pay 800 million dollars for their lies about

voting machines in support of Trump's claim that Biden stole the election. This was only one aspect of their lies.
They supported an attempted coup on our democracy. It is ridiculous to imagine that they would give Kamala a level playing field.

[EndlessWire]

73. I disagree.

Originally, I didn't want her to debate at all. Now I'm coming around to the Sept. 10th debate. I see that she has used the prospect well, and probably will end up alone answering questions, so she has a national audience. Trump seems afraid to show up.

But, she should not allow him to jerk her around and take control of the narrative. He's just playing games now. I think that the last interview with the Black female panel of reporters showed how to shut down his gish gallop technique. It would be a bit different with the terms of the debate, allowing only the moderators to shut off the torrent, which I believe they might not be as efficient at it, but still, Kamala will be well versed at redirection and shutting him down. So, I am not afraid to see her do it, but I don't expect a well turned out actual debate, because Donald seems to be falling apart.

The date of September 4th as a proposed Fox debate is interesting, as it is two days before J. Merchan will announce his findings on the immunity portion of the Hush Money case. That would take away a portion of the discussion, as I think I want to hear Kamala talk about it, should it go our way. I'd like to hear her ask how he will govern from jail, should it come to that. What's he gonna say, that he won't likely go to jail for his crimes? That's an admission that he crimed.

But, no to a debate on Fox. Stick to the venue originally chosen. Or, don't debate at all. ABC can make a program around an empty podium. Kamala will look Presidential and vibrant, and can talk to the American people. We are going to kick Trump's ass.

[Zoomie1986]

74. When you understand why you don't go

Into a rattlesnake den naked...

Or why black people don't go to KKK meetings...

Then you'll understand how very stupid it would be for Ms Harris to go on Fox at all, never mind under terms that her opponent would dictate, with no input from her, or concessions to her, allowed.

Smart people don't go where they will be in unnecessary danger.

[2 Meow Momma]

75. No. He can't dictate to her. He can try but she must not follow. nt

[epreic01]

76. Respectfully Disagree... sort of

I think if she’s open to it she should request a fact checker in real time and a should request Wallace moderate along with one of the black journalists from the other day. They were GOOD.

[Dave Bowman]

77. Nope, bad idea.

[Rocknation]

79. Absolutely not (and ABSOLUTELY absolutely not until AFTER September 10)

Last edited Sun Aug 4, 2024, 10:30 AM - Edit history (1)

If Trump wants to do on September 4 on Fox what Harris plans to do on September 10 on ABC if he doesn't show up, that is no business of hers.


Rocknation

[bluestarone]

81. NO!

A MILLION TIMES NO!

[Deuxcents]

83. NO. And hell no. We don't negotiate with insurrectionists felons

[jujubeets]

84. I'll say it again

Trump agreed to the Biden debate without reservations nor qualifications. He's one-up now and will claim poor sportsmanship. It's just not a good look for our team.

Harris will wipe the floor with him anytime anywhere. While the current strategy is solid, and can win, whipping him on Fox would sew it up.

[bdjhawk]

85. Should she debate at all?

If Rump doesn’t go along with exactly what was previously agreed to , Kamala has an out. Should she take it?

We all know she is so much smarter and more eloquent than the orange doofus. But I keep thinking that she has so much positive momentum now so why risk it at all? Even if she overwhelmingly wins the debate on merit , it will get twisted around that she was condescending, bitchy, blah blah blah. Yes, that is all BS but why risk the momentum at all? We all thought Hillary was equally superior and the debate with Rump didn’t do a damn thing for her. As with the VP selection, perhaps “do no harm” should be at the forefront of the decision on how to proceed with debate decisions. Any thoughts?

[KentuckyWoman]

86. Any conditions? No. He wants WWE not a debate.

Fox is not a problem but the conditions need to match what was already agreed for CNN. He "won" that one so that boxes him in. Also, I'd like to see Harris talk ABC into keeping the forum and time. If he doesn't show then she's got the stage to herself for a serious conversation about the future of America.

[mucholderthandirt]

89. Nope.

She should never, ever give in to anything he says. Show up in September, Don-old, like you agreed. Or nothing. She has no need whatsoever to debate that idiot, and never under his terms. Can you imagine what he'd be saying if she did do his debate? OMG, it would never end.

She must never be weak, or accommodating, or anything like that.

So any Harris people scrolling here, tell her "No ma'am, it's not a good idea, never agree to do anything that bastard says, fuck him. Keep the weirdo thing going, it's making the MAGA crazy. It's making them say even more weird shit."

[Tanuki]

90. He's demanding "a full arena audience."

What he is proposing in not a debate but a campaign rally filled with screaming MAGA stooges chanting "lock her up" or whatever brainless catchphrase he suggests.

[Paladin]

91. No. Not a chance in hell. (nt)

[Autumn]

92. She should not debate him at all. Fuck that shit. Who is that ass to set the rules of

anything? Fuck him.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

93. Fox News should not host a debate