Donald Trump agreed to debate Joe Biden on June 27 and Sept 10. He even submitted to their rules, their moderators, their channels. Then Biden folded and Harris was anointed without primaries. Harris began boasting she would debate Trump, and said in Atlanta “whatever he says, say it to my face.” The challenge drew loud applause from her crowd, but was it just bravado?
Trump now wants to debate her on FOX on Sept. 4 with a live audience. Harris is fudging wanting the Sept. 10 date on ABC with the earlier rules. Keep in mind, Trump never agreed to that date with Harris or her campaign team, it was with Biden. It’s basic contract law, new parties to the contract, new terms. As an attorney she should know that but maybe not as she was busy jailing pot smokers in California.
It’s really just a stunt to fool those who want to believe her. With zero pressers or interviews, she’s really not ready or prepared to debate on any topic relevant to voters. So she claims in her ads she wants “an economy that works for everyone.” In light of Friday’s poor jobs report along with the highest unemployment number since 2021 (CNN 8/2/24) and a stock market sell off causing real fears of a Biden recession, she might not want to answer for that.
If and when she decides to debate, which Kamala would show up, which face will she present?
Ralph Miller
* * *
Occasionally, I agree with Mr. Ralph Miller. I agree with him about a debate between VP Harris and the defendant/felon/candidate. A contract existed, but the requirements changed. That allows the defendant/felon/candidate or VP Harris to offer to negotiate a new contract for a debate.
VP Harris obviously wants to debate the defendant/felon/candidate. Frankly, knowing that he will either answer with lies, which are easily debunked by facts, or that he will not answer questions at all, as he did in the first debate when the focus was on the President, I’d like to debate him too.
However, the real issue is if the defendant/felon/candidate would even show up.
I’ll be extremely surprised if the defendant/felon/candidate shows, assuming a debate is scheduled. He wouldn’t listen anyway, but for him, a debate is a no-win situation. Especially since facts are an obstacle to him: something to be evaded.
The "stunt" (Mr. Miller’s term) is the defendant/felon/candidate thinking he can debate. He offered zero, zip, nada, nothing when debating Biden. He never answered a single question, either evading with a different topic that the one asked, or as described by Henrietta Treyz, managing partner and director of economic policy research at the consulting firm Veda Partners: "President Trump stuck to his factually incorrect messaging points (meaning lies) tonight." That very accurately describes the defendant/felon/candidate’s showing.
And based on the MAGA “spinners” comments, don’t reply that defendant/felon/candidate “won” the debate. Based on the perception of his mental acuity and ability to recall specifics, Biden’s “performance” does not automatically make the defendant/felon/candidate a winner.
Continuing: "With zero pressers or interviews, she’s really not ready or prepared to debate on any topic relevant to voters." So says Mr. Miller. I’ve no idea of how Mr. Miller arrives at that conclusion.
"She wants an economy that works for everyone." Mr. Miller is correct about that statement. However, he is wrong in stating VP Harris would not answer if questioned about a single jobs report and a Wall Street sell-off. Why does "the invisible hand" of Adam Smith now come to mind?
BTW, "Friday’s poor jobs report along with the highest unemployment number since 2021 (CNN 8/2/24)" are akin to a single bad review of a restaurant that has had nothing but positive reviews since new owners took over 3½ years ago. And that single bad review discouraged a few customers from eating there. One bad review doesn’t mean the restaurant has to fire the chef.
Similarly, Mr. Miller doesn’t want you to eat at that restaurant based on that one bad review.
Joe Warren
* * *
If Kamala debates Trump on Fox, she would be an idiot. There is an interesting letter to the editor in the New York Times (Aug. 6) wherein the writer says the questions would be similar to this:
They would ask Kamala, "Wwhat would you do if Putin expanded his war with Ukraine into other countries?”
They would ask Trump, “What is your favorite color?”
Trump is afraid to debate Kamala on level ground, he is afraid of her, he is afraid of black women. He did not like the lady who was asking him questions at the Chicago Black Journalist meeting. He belabored the concept of her being a South Asian mix with a Black from the Islands. What difference does it make? He is worried about color but he puts orange on his face probably to cover up a cosmetic problem that he has. He is reacting to silly things. He seems upset that it was Biden who brought the Russian prisoners home, not him. He is terrified of Kamala’s rise in the polls because of yesterday’s court decision saying that a couple of cases could continue before the election and either one could put him in prison.
He is simply a scared man the way things are today.
Raleigh C. Perry
* * *
I want to respond to Joe Warren. Can you just tell me what Kamala Harris has done for the us, the people. Just name one thing.
She is a radical, laughing, unfiltered person. Look what she and Biden have done for the borders. Do you have any idea how many terrorists they have let in to our country?
Plus the economy is the worst ever. Look at the stock market today. Go pump gas and buy groceries.
Yes, I’ll vote for the “convicted felon”. Charges that were brought by their Democratic prosecutor and judge, that was originally stated as a misdemeanor.
Charlotte Page
* * *
Trump was fully aware of what he was doing when he "suggested" the new debate format. He had control over all the variables and set up an environment that would likely be hostile. He knew there was little chance Kamala would agree to participate in such a spectacle.
Furthermore, what tangible benefits did Trump provide for everyday people, aside from fostering division?
A jury of his peers found him guilty, regardless of who brought the charges. He was found guilty of fraud and is also civilly liable for sexual assault, as determined by a court.
Given these circumstances, he should not be considered a viable candidate. Why choose new everything? Just show up to what you agreed to.
Christopher Cooper
* * *
Choosing a restaurant is in no way comparable to choosing a President of the United States. That statement by Mr. Warren may reveal a lot about how and why the left votes the way they do.
Gerald Presley