this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2024
280 points (97.0% liked)

politics

18883 readers
4441 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
 

Trump didn’t want, much less imagine, a debate with Harris. Not so subconsciously he still thinks he’s facing Joe Biden

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 189 points 1 week ago (9 children)

What will happen: Harris will put in a fine performance, coolly parrying his attacks and laying out a coherent vision for her presidential term. The press will latch onto one thing—perhaps some ambiguity around tax policy or her correcting herself after starting to say the wrong word —and blow it up into existential doubts about the very basis of her campaign. Meanwhile, Trump will ramble semicoherently, spouting disjointed assertions about protecting the border or the children or whatever, segueing into stories about golfing with famous people or immigrants abducting and transing American children, calls for mass executions of bad guys and word salad with no discernible meaning. The media will helpfully gloss over that, pointing out that he “forcefully advocated American interests” and is “in tune with public concerns about security/the economy”. They’ll award it to him, judging that he had regained the initiative and Harris is now on the run, and the 99.9% of the public who didn’t watch the debate themselves will believe that.

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 43 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I really don't understand why Harris doesn't just do Town Hall after Town Hall everywhere. Even Sanders did a Fox News town hall (though in this case I doubt fox would offer).

Town Hall events seem perfect to get Trump out of the way, and have Americans get to know you. Do like 3 in PA.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 22 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Because people generally don't care about policy. And those of us who do can just listen to reputable reporters.

As far as the public is concerned, trump scared Biden off in that last debate. Kamala needs this to show she is "stronger" as it were.

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm cool with a debate to showcase the contrast and prove Harris can hold her own. But the nature of these faux debates always seem to give the advantage to the bully. So with that said, it's not necessarily about policy but vibes. Obama did tons of town halls for this reason. Many voters including in the most recent NYT Siena poll just don't know enough about her yet. A town hall gives that chance that is less scripted than a rally and more personable than a debate.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip -1 points 1 week ago

Of course trump has the advantage. He will scream the n-word at the top of his lungs and will just mute Kamala to protect him. That is a given

But Kamala still needs to get up there and show she can "hold her own". Because that gets rid of the inevitable "Are you afraid to debate me? Biden tried once and then he had to run home and cry about his dead son instead" attacks.

They've been waiting for this debate to do a huge PR blitz. Trump is exhausting his campaign by doing non-stop bullshit events, and she needs to really get it out there that he is deranged, and possibly embarrass him on national TV, then just hammer that home until election day.

Once this one is out of the way, expect them to have a bunch of new events out there (especially Walz).

[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 week ago

...semicoherently

My...aren't we the optimist...

[–] Wytch@lemmy.zip 16 points 1 week ago

Two completely different standards applied simultaneously, amplified by media's fawning obsession over this narcissistic shitbag and Harris' status as a WoC

[–] Kalkaline@leminal.space 13 points 1 week ago

Fucking Nostradamus over here.

[–] anon6789@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

This is why I sit through these things, despite them being of relatively little benefit to me, as I follow politics regularly, so I'm not surprised who these people are. I trust the press in general, but they summarize these things so poorly.

The first Biden debate, he seemed sick from the start, and I think he did ok for being an ill elderly guy, and Trump just spewed BS. I'd give more credit to the guy that toughed it out while sick to do his job than some hyper guy rambling on like a crazy person. The makeup speech where he was supposed to bring the energy stank though, and that's when I began to lose hope in him winning, even though I think he's exceeded my expectations I had for him.

I don't like the pull to the right I feel Kamala's taking, but she's still miles ahead of her competition, but I want to hear her stances through her own words, not a crappy summary from the news.

There's no chance in hell anything in this debate will change my choice, but I think this election is a pivotal place in our history as a country, and I don't want to ignore it for a Reddit quality summary tomorrow if I can watch it live.

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 6 points 1 week ago

I think you're right. Also, everyone is expecting Kamala to demolish Trump in the debate for whatever reason, so her putting in a solid, competent performance will be seen as a failure by everyone and feed into the narrative.

[–] blackbarn@lemm.ee 3 points 1 week ago

Sanewashing indeed

[–] telllos@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

I think they will attack her because she is a woman.