"Agree to both, with ABC debate first to prevent Trump from pulling a fast one"

[Miles Archer]

Reacting to the past two weeks as the candidacy of Vice President Kamala Harris has energized the Democratic base and seemingly caught Donald Trump's campaign flatfooted, a former GOP lawmaker claimed the former president is terrified by what the future may hold.

Appearing on MSNBC on Sunday afternoon with host Alex Witt, ex-Rep Dave Jolly (R-FL) claimed the ex-president's campaign continues to show it is in disarray as his inner circle tries to push for an alternative debate hosted by Fox News instead of one already slated for ABC.

Agreeing with his fellow panelists that there could be two debates, Jolly suggested Harris should agree to doing both, but with the Fox News event second to prevent the embattled former president from pulling a fast one and canceling the ABC appearance.

https://www.rawstory.com/terrified-trump/

[onecaliberal]

1. No, make him stick to the schedule HE agreed to. There has been no change in his campaign. The Vice President is ready

to honor the schedule President Biden agreed to. That is it. No more appeasing it.

Edit to add: He thinks he can dictate everything. He needs to be made to heel.

[Miles Archer]

5. I agree with you 100% in principle.

That said, we know that if he does Fox on Sept 4, he won't be at ABC on Sept 10.

[onecaliberal]

8. So what. Let America see the Vice President. It would be a great opportunity for her to respond to questions without

standing next to satan and his vomit.

As far as "fox" goes. They are a fascist mouthpiece. They admitted in court they are not legitimate news. The Vice President should not appear there for their propaganda rag.

[servermsh]

2. Abssolutely no debate on Fox. That's ridiculous.

[Miles Archer]

7. It will be CNN Town Hall II.

1). Softball questions (for Trump, not for Harris...she'll get the "gotcha" questions)

2). No fact checking (once again, for Trump only)

3). A hand-picked audience of MAGAts who will applaud on demand, giggle at all of Trump's stand-up "comedy," and boo Harris.

[hlthe2b]

3. If there is to be an audience at either... there have to be controls over it.

TSF wants a MAGA-filled uncontrolled audience to drown out Harris. Surely both network and Harris campaign realize this... ?

[Miles Archer]

10. The Harris Campaign CANNOT AGREE TO a "CNN Town Hall" hand-picked MAGAt audience.

I don't know how they can reasonably participate in audience selection, since that would involve "trusting" Fox, but no...Kamala Harris cannot debate in front of a 100% MAGAt audience, which is exactly what Trump wants.

[returnee]

4. Give him nothing!

He deserves nothing but derision. He is beneath contempt, a criminal, a traitor. Call him out for what he is, and when he call her afraid, call him out again.

[agingdem]

29. Right..

Last edited Sun Aug 4, 2024, 05:27 PM - Edit history (1)

he is in no position to make demands..he knows he's losing and he's desperate to retake control the narrative..

if Trump is serious about debating Kamala on Fox then maybe he should show up at Fox on the night of the supposed debate and spew racists/misogynist slurs, lies, insults, and threats at a lectern..that would show her who's the man!

[Bev54]

6. Nope absolutely not, she has no reason to give him anything. I do believe that suggestion

that she do both debates came from a republican strategist, Susan De Percio and Jolly didn't agree with her but said if she was to do both she should do the abc debate first, not giving Trump the ability to hold the first debate on his stage with his people. Jolly only agreed with 2 debates but first abc and then maybe Fox. The other panelist said no to the debate at Fox.

[Miles Archer]

14. There are a number of ways of looking at it...

...I do agree, fully, that he should be given nothing.

Question is, if he's locked into agreeing to do the ABC debate as a condition for doing the Fox debate, after she destroys him on ABC, what would his recourse be? To go on Fox and hurl racial insults at her, to go full-bore "birther" and demand to see HER birth certificate? Granted, the MAGAts would LOVE that, but what about the rest of the ocuntry?

[Bev54]

16. We all know there will only be one debate, if there is any, because she will destroy him, but the point

is she does not owe him anything to do a debate at Fox. Someone here, the other day, linked to a tweet that suggested the debate be at Harris's sorority with Mark Hamill and Chelsea Clinton as moderators. Put that forward, is no more crazier than Fox.

[Miles Archer]

20. I fully agree with the "she owes him nothing" concept

And he agreed to the debate, and as was pointed out yesterday...and I am too lazy to look up the link at the moment...he agreed to debate the DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE, it did not say "JOE BIDEN," so there was no "escape hatch" for him if that candidate turned out to NOT be Joe.

[mvd]

9. No to FOX

It would be just like Hannity and Colmes used to be. Stacked against her.

[Miles Archer]

15. OUCH

I used to watch Hannity & Colmes. My era of "political awareness" basically came with Al Franken's book "Lies And The Lying Liars Who Tell Them." I didn't know Karl Rove existed before that book. So I watched Hannity & Colmes like I watched any other show, and did see that Colmes was being used for sport, and AFTER I realized what was happening, that was the end of my Fox viewing.

[demmiblue]

11. No. n/t

[mzmolly]

12. Nope

[BComplex]

13. WHY don't democrats get it? We need to start broadcasting that Fox IS NOT NEWS, and has no business

in an election. They ARE the problem with this country, and they need to keep being called out for it.

You want "weird"??? They are again saying COVID was a hoax. A million Americans died from their "hoax", just like they say school shootings were a hoax.

FOX IS NOT NEWS, and should not be honored with a debate of any kind with serious issues.

News has been that Rupert Murdock screwed up when he put fox & news corp into an irrevocable trust with his 4 kids, when the other 3 besides Lachlan are far more moderate politically, and don't want fox news being so WEIRD. And they won't let Rupert rewrite the trust to put the news in just Lachlan's name. 3 out of the 5 Murdochs involved know better that fox is not news.

On edit: I do know however that their polls are usually spot on.

[Miles Archer]

18. I'm with you on this, and I'll ask the question I asked upstream in this thread...

Let's say she agrees to both, with ABC first, NO AUDIENCE.

She will DESTROY him.

Even if she AGREED to the Fox debate AFTER ABC, if she reduced him to a wet orange puddle on ABC, would he even CONSENT to doing a SECOND debate? ESPECIALLY of the Harris Campaign had SOME level of control over the audience and prevented another CNN "Town Hall" debacle?

[Gaytano70]

17. Fuck to the NO

[GoCubsGo]

19. So, let him cancel the ABC debate.

Doing so only reflects badly on him. And, it provides the Harris campaign some good fodder for ads. I'm sure Stephanie Miller will be happy to donate the use of her chickens singing "Swan Lake" audio clip to the cause.

[GoodRaisin]

21. No. There is no reason for Kamala to even respond to his Fox News bullshit.

She is way too smart for that. She has him on his heels now. The polling is turning against him and she has at least 2 more bumps coming, first from her VP pick; and second from the convention. All she has to do now is stay her course while he continues to implode. By September 10th he’ll be begging ABC and Kamala to let him back in.

[Miles Archer]

25. Looking at all of the possibilities...

...IF she made the Fox debate CONDITIONAL on his doing ABC first (NOT suggesting she SHOULD)...WOULD he agree to it, with the understanding that if he blew off ABC, Fox would AUTOMATICALLY be canceled?

Because it's facing her on ABC, without a hand-picked MAGAt audience, that has him terrified.

[GoodRaisin]

28. Just my opinion, but she doesn't NEED to debate him at all.

Letting him just keep on destroying himself seems to be working for her just fine. There is no circumstance a rigged Fox debate would help her. Would rather no debate at all.

[Miles Archer]

36. Makes perfect sense.

I'm confident she'll make the right decision. So far, she is letting him hang himself with his own rope. No reason to discontinue that tactic.

[Botany]

22. A Republican is telling the Harris Campaign what they should do?

The answer will be a big fat no. Trump and Vance are in free fall right now like something
I have never seen so why should Harris and company help them out?

Link to tweet

?lang=en

[Retrograde]

23. Nope. Stick with the ABC event

(I will not dignify it by calling it a debate) as originally agreed to. Donnie will behave badly enough at that one: don't give him another platform on fawning Fox. Fox gives him enough air time as it is.

[TheKentuckian]

24. No, he doesn't get to negotiate one and just dictate the terms of another

If he wants to NEGOTIATE terms for another then that can have all due consideration but no bending the knee and dancing to his tune.

[Miles Archer]

26. And yes, it WAS presented as a DEMAND, not a negotiation

He still thinks he has control BEYOND the stranglehold he has on whatever is left of "the Republican party."

[Scrivener7]

27. That's dumb. If she agrees to the Fox one, the MAGA morons will take it as a win.

Right now they're demoralized. Give them nothing.

[Sugarcoated]

30. I was watching that segment

and right before he said that I said the same.

[Hekate]

31. No. Never again.

[Carlitos Brigante]

32. He gets nothing! He loses! Why people insist on bending over backwards for a colicky toddler is

beyond me. For once in this miserable meat goblin's life, make him stick to an agreement.

[onandup]

33. Yes to ABC then Fox PROVIDED

There is no audience and mics are cut, similar to the CNN debate. Oh, the Fox moderators are subject to approval, too.

[Hugin]

34. Absolutely not.

Trump has always been given what he wants to placate his tantrums and look at what it’s created. Please, not this time.

[themaguffin]

35. No, no, no. First, regardless of network, audiences should be a non starter. F that.

[Miles Archer]

37. That's the dealbreaker for me...

...and he would be lost without an audience at this point.

[Autumn]

38. No, that would be stupid. He agreed to the debate that he's chickened out of.

Fuck any Fox debate and Trump. Kamala doesn't need to give into him on anything.