this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2024
727 points (98.7% liked)

politics

18883 readers
3939 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 255 points 1 week ago (7 children)

She needs to still show up as scheduled, say that just because trump won't make time for the American people doesn't mean she will ignore them

Either he takes the bait and shows up, or she dominates the news cycle now, before the debate, during the debate, and after it

The whole time trump won't be able to talk about anything besides the debate and how it's not "fair".

It's the common sense move, so I'll be surprised to see it, but I hope they do.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago

Just bait him more by attacking his ego

[–] [email protected] 122 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Make it a town hall. We really do need to hear questions and answers of serious topics now that the clown has left the big top.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This is a far better option. Holding a debate without the other candidate is fodder for Trump to do the same on ONN or Fox News. But holding a town hall and inviting Trump as an optional attendee would create engagement, and either Trump will ignore it, join the same one, or hold his own and most likely screw up his own.

Win, win, win.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago (2 children)

He'd hold his own to a "town" of handpicked shills.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 6 days ago

"Mr. Trump, people are saying immigrants are flooding across our borders to eat our pets before receiving sexual reassignment surgery in prison. Do you have a concept of a plan how to deal with this?"

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It looks like he already had at least one called a town hall coordinated with FOX News a week ago. It looks like he only answered questions from Hannity and not the audience full of supporters, so they couldn't even pull off the handpicked shills pretend town hall format.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The moderator should also ask the empty podium the same question they just asked Harris, with a brief pause to emphasize that he is a no-show.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Most of the commenters calling for Harris to do this were probably in elementary school 10 years ago🤣

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

it's not like the filming of empty podiums is ahistorical.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Just treat the debate as normal, but they just swap to the empty podium where Trump should have been.

After the debate they say Trump showed a marked improvement this time.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Clint Eastwood tried that and it was cringey as fuck

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago

Talking to a chair awkwardly is not at all what's being suggested here

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

She needs to still show up as scheduled, say that just because trump won't make time for the American people doesn't mean she will ignore them

That reminds of the 2020 presidential election in Poland when both candidates did exactly what you describe - they debated at the same time but in separate studios. And the story how it came to that is wild.

This was after the first round of the elections (where two candidates are selected for the second round), which involved things like last-minute rescheduling of the elections, last-minute candidate swap and effectively throwing away 20 million dollars of public money. Currently there are several criminal investigations conducted against people involved in organisation of that first round. And of course it was all in the middle of the pandemic. So the political chaos was at its absolute peak.

The two candidates were the country's president representing then ruling party and capital city's mayor representing then biggest opposition party. Both of course wanted the debate. The issue was that then ruling party turned the public broadcaster into a party propaganda machine compared by experts to that created by Goebbels. And the core of that propaganda was that the second biggest (private) broadcaster in Poland (owned by Discovery Group) is anti-Polish and cannot be trusted.

Both broadcasters offered they can organise the debate. The private one I believe was also willing to jointly host it. But the ruling party candidate couldn't agree to a debate hosted by the private broadcaster because that would significantly impact the propaganda and expose his many wrongdoings to the manipulated ruling party voters.

On the other hand, the opposition candidate couldn't agree for the debate hosted only by the public broadcaster because that would effectively be 2 hours of him trying to deny lies spread by hosts and the other candidate.

The 2nd round was coming close and no compromise has been found. So on the same day the two broadcasters prepared their studios for two candidates with audience. Ruling party candidate went to public broadcaster, opposition candidate to private one. Both declared the other as a "no-show" and proceeded to have a "debate" with hosts and audience.

Few days later the opposition candidate lost by a small margin.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

What a clown show