My, what a difference an hour and a half makes in terms of political egos and personal strategies.
Speaking specifically of Democrat presidential nominee cackling Kamala Harris and her
willingness to meet Donald Trump in a debate setting. Prior to Tuesday night, you remember, Harris was non-committal about wanting to engage Trump in a one-on-one setting and finally agreed figuring she had to in order to convince her suckers – oops, I mean Democrat voters – that she had the right stuff to assume control over the socialist legacy of not only her boss, senile Joe Biden, but also “The One”, Barack Obama. Obama’s eyes are constantly watching all Democrat pols to ensure they’re staying loyal and true to the leftist mission to transform America.
Anyway, Tuesday in Philadelphia apparently changed cackling Kamala’s mind towards doing more debates, and she’s now anxious to ink another one with Trump. Like a first grader who suddenly discovers she wants to ride the kiddie roller coaster over-and-over again after initially being frightened of the big monster, Kamala supposedly has the debate bug. Bad.
And why shouldn’t she? For ninety-plus minutes in the City of Brotherly Love, she got to smile, smirk and have a good ol’ time while making Trump look like a buffoon, even her more obvious lies remaining unchallenged by the biased fact-checking (Trump only) moderators, which allowed Harris to execute her substance-free gameplan to its fullest.
‘Wow, this works!’ Cackling Kamala must’ve thought to herself as Trump, time and again, took the “bait” her handlers had drilled into her noggin prior to the program’s start. Heck, she even walked over to him and offered her hand before the cameras started rolling. Liberals loved her “performance” and now, no one is mentioning possibly kicking her off the Democrat ticket.
Who’s flabbergasted that she wants more now? In an article titled “Fox News Proposes 2nd Harris-Trump Debate in October”, Katabella Roberts reported at The Epoch Times yesterday:
“Fox News has offered to host a second presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump in October, the television network confirmed on Sept. 10. The network sent a letter to the Harris and Trump campaigns offering to host a 90-minute debate moderated by anchors Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum, stating that they would be the best choices for the proposed event, Fox News reported...
“[Fox News’s] Wallace and Loker proposed three potential dates and locations for the debate: Oct. 9 in Arizona, Oct. 15 in Georgia, and Oct. 16 in North Carolina…
“In their letter, Wallace and Loker said candidates would stand behind podiums without any props or prewritten notes, and a coin flip would determine podium placement and the order of closing statements if the network hosted the second debate.”
Of course, this is all a tad premature until Trump gives the go-ahead, and he had been non-committal about wanting to enter the arena with Harris again, no doubt gun shy after being tag-teamed by Harris and the ABC “moderators” the other night.
On Thursday, speaking at a rally in Arizona, Trump made it plain that there wouldn’t be any more debates for him. This is his last campaign, which means he’s through with it. Done. Over. It’s so yesterday. The only question being whether he’ll change his mind – again.
And why wouldn’t Harris want another go-round with Trump? She thinks she’s already found the winning secret to not only surviving on stage with the older and more experienced – and smarter – man, she thinks she can replicate the entire performance on a date closer to the election.
Why? Seeing Trump being led astray by obvious triggers tossed out by debate moderators or Democrat opponents reminds me of a story my kids used to tell me about one of their middle school teachers. This man apparently harbored a personal vendetta against timeshares. If the class’s obnoxious kids sensed said teacher was getting too serious about any particular lesson – and hence would require them to study extra hard to memorize it – all they would need to do is get the man going on the evils of timeshares.
Timeshares, you ask? Yup. Timeshares. Simply put, he hated them, and would rant virtually uncontrollably for the remainder of the class period. It was that easy, too, like a “get out of lesson” free card just for mentioning the all-important buzzword.
Similarly, Trump cannot resist the temptation to go far off topic whenever a Democrat mentions crowd size, rallygoers’ enthusiasm levels or any other aspect of the Republican’s indisputable popularity open to his enemies mocking or ridicule. Recall back to Inauguration Day, 2017, when Trump boasted after the festivities concluded that his crowd was so large he couldn’t see the horizon on the Washington mall, claiming his was the largest such assemblage of all time, dwarfing even that of Barack Obama years earlier.
I remember, because I was there, but I didn’t get the impression that the audience size overwhelmed Washington DC. Why? Because of the miscreant trash protesters that were also in attendance, which I surmised must have scared away a lot of good people from making the try. I knew a lot of Trump fans who’d wanted to go but stayed away due to fears of hostility.
Were there credible violent threats at Barack Obama’s Inauguration? Highly doubtful. The last thing any decent human being wants is to be accosted by truly violent leftists celebrating the ascension of one of their own.
At any rate, Democrats no doubt recognize the topics in a debate setting that get Trump animated and would find a way to, if permitted (kind of like my kids’ tempestuous anti-timeshare middle school teacher), set him off. I won’t claim that it’s as predictable as the tides, but having studied the political portion of Trump’s career, he can’t resist defending his “honor” whenever it comes to his own ego.
Similarly, seeing as the proposed second debate was put forward by Fox News – to be moderated by the gentlemanly and earnest Brett Baier and staid Martha MacCallum – I would think Trump would have found the temptation to agree to it irresistible. The former president no doubt recalls the stinging criticism that Baier and MacCallum partook in on January 6, 2021, but in the time since, the Fox News anchors have regained their reputation for being tough, but fair, journalists.
If Democrats truly sought a fair “debate” about the issues and evenly balanced, they would agree to a forum where Tucker Carlson would do the questioning for cackling Kamala Harris and Rachel Maddow would quiz Trump. That way, conservatives would know ahead of time the moderator is biased and be more prepared for the types of questions – and fact checking – that was coming their direction.
For his part, I believe Carlson would give it his all to be fair. That’s just the way Tucker is and has always been.
If Maddow were in charge of the subject matter, Trump would recognize that Democrats would try to get him distracted with a plethora of questions about his-versus-Senile Joe’s and Kamala’s crowd sizes, their respective decibel levels, how great their families are, his golf handicap, how much they each love animals and, how many cops were killed on January 6.
Or how many dictators Trump is buddies with, what Kim Jong Un is really like in person and how racist Trump is for suggesting there are criminals in the throngs of illegal aliens that Kamala n’ senile Joe allow in from the porous southern border.
Another possible alternative would be to make Debate #2 a town-hall-type forum, which is the format the campaigns used for the second presidential debate in the recent past. Do you recall how Crooked Hillary Clinton accused Trump of “stalking” because he was allegedly standing too close behind her when she had her back to him while talking to citizen questioners at a town hall?
Though it already seems like the Fox people have determined that the second debate logistics would be similar if not identical to the first.
Trump said, unequivocally, that he’s not doing it, but should he? Here’s thinking it would definitely be to his advantage to put in the time. Cackling Kamala certainly did well on style points the other night, but she risks repeating the same type of showing on other occasions. Not everyone takes to her constant grins, dismissive head shakes and mocking behavior. She’s certainly not duty bound to demonstrate a plethora of respect for the hated Trump, but she should at least act deferential in some respect.
After all, he was president of the United States once. And she’ll have to display a semblance of deference to other Republicans whether she wins or not. Otherwise, what would she do, be an MSNBC talk show host?
It also shouldn’t be forgotten, by Trump, that after cackling Kamala’s initial introduction to the national audience during the Democrat primaries in 2020, her candidacy’s luster wore off pretty quickly. In other words, as soon as people got a sustained glance at her, she looked a lot less attractive as a leftist powerful man’s former mistress.
Conservatives are waiting for that sheen to dull quickly, and a second debate with Harris just might do the trick. Republicans shouldn’t risk having Kamala retreat back into her shell and never be seen again, like senile Joe did four years ago. Like tarnish on silver, the more she’s exposed to air, the more oxidized she becomes.
Trump also would likely appreciate an opportunity to clean up the loose ends in his debate approach for the next time. The more he debates in a cycle, the better he usually does.
Lastly, no one can say for sure who came out better from Tuesday’s event. Kamala seemingly won convincingly on “style points”, but there’s some evidence that Trump’s belated end-of-debate jabs about Harris’s record paid some benefit. Either way, voters could use more time to size up the candidates together.
We’ll probably know soon whether Donald Trump will change his mind and accept Fox’s – or some other media outlet’s – invitation to meet for a second presidential debate. Both candidates might benefit from another chance to peck at the other, and the American people would also welcome it. October could provide the chance we’ve been waiting for.
Joe Biden economy
inflation
Biden cognitive decline
gas prices,
Nancy Pelosi
Biden senile
Kamala Harris candidacy
Donald Trump campaign
Harris Trump debates
J.D. Vance
Kamala vice president
Speaker Mike Johnson
Donald Trump assassination
2022 elections
Donald Trump
2024 presidential election
Tim Walz
Comments