this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2024
54 points (74.1% liked)

politics

19090 readers
3987 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
all 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] meco03211@lemmy.world 62 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Honestly, I'm ok with Biden not participating in them. At this point they likely do more harm than good to him. Trump will just vomit whatever he feels like regardless of the question. He'll lie and get his little quips in.

The only way I see trump losing any support is if he suffers some major medical episode on stage, or finally drops a bigger racial slur (something like "darker people" would likely get a pass whereas the n word might finally take him down a notch). The incoherent rambling will get a pass. The thinly veiled racism or bigotry will get a pass. And all of that will just be soundbites for his slobbering masses to eat up.

[–] xor@infosec.pub 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

a lot of people see biden as a senile, completely out of it old man...
leftish people...
(i had this argument last night)
the last debates really helped that image, and i think were crucial for winning.

if there's no debate this time, far too many people will assume it's because he can't keep up...

he can't afford to look even slightly afraid of Cheeto Hitler....

[–] meco03211@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

But there doesn't need to be a debate to accomplish that. He can do town halls or other public appearances.

[–] xor@infosec.pub 4 points 8 months ago

nah, we need to hear joe tell him to shut up again

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 48 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Problem is, Trump won't debate him back. He'll just use the debate as a podium to spout falsehoods.

[–] twistypencil@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Didn't work last time, Trump looked like a coked up idiot and Biden told him to shut up, that played really well for Biden

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Yeah, we probably don't need to see that one again though, we're still good.

[–] FanciestPants@lemmy.world 32 points 8 months ago

Can't we just rewatch the ones from 4 years ago and get the general idea?

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 25 points 8 months ago

A debate won't solve anything and Trump doesn't need any more time on a large public platform.

[–] MisterCrisper@lemmy.world 21 points 8 months ago (1 children)

One of the problems with this is that the debate rules are not enforced. If you go back and watch Trump in previous debates he continually ignores the time limits and talks over the moderator when told his time is up. Microphones for both participants should automatically shut off when the speaker's time is up.

Also, obvious, outright lies should earn a microphone cutoff although this would be dependent on a moderator that would be acceptable to both debaters. I can't see Trump ever agreeing to live fact checking during a debate.

Additionally, Trump appears to be even less mentally capable than he was in the previous debates - I do not believe it would end well for him.

[–] Uranium3006@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago

You could have a panel of 3 one chose by each cannidate and one both agree to and 2/3 can mute anyone at any time

[–] paddirn@lemmy.world 17 points 8 months ago

He really shouldn't, and he should say he's not going to because he thinks that Trump should be disqualified from running for being an insurrectionist. At this point, there's really nothing to be gained from even trying to debate Trump, as Trump isn't even trying to participate in the democratic process in good faith. Hell, the Republican party in general is not participating in the democratic process in good faith. Anyone who is still "on the fence" about who they will vote for is either an idiot who hasn't been paying attention or a centrist just looking for an excuse to vote for the fascists.

[–] ctkatz@lemmy.ml 11 points 8 months ago

normally debating draws clearer distinctions between the candidates and helps the low information voter in making their decision.

this isn't a normal election.

you have one candidate who is a normal politician willing and able to make his case for what he feels is best in moving the other forward. the other is a raving ranting tax cheat and sexual predator who has absolutely no clue about foreign policy, domestic policy, financial policy and is transparently going after one type of person. that other person is also easily swayed to do everything that a minority of a minority population wants because that demographic cheers him and praises him as a god king.

there is absolutely nothing to be gained from a debate between the two major party candidates other than the disgust of a nation when one of them spews his vitriol about the non whites and the stochastic terrorism he inspires from his unchecked hate speech. it is in the best interests of that candidate to not debate, since the political media does every fucking thing in it's power to not accurately or report in a timely fashion the utterly bizzare and undemocratic statements he makes on a regular basis. letting him fly free to direct questioning will only drive away the middle of the voting population, the ones who actually vote people into office.

[–] SayJess@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

What a stupid idea. TFG doesn’t care about anything unless it personally benefits him. We cannot give him what he wants.

[–] TheaoneAndOnly27@kbin.social 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

What does TFG mean? I keep trying to think of things, "that fucking guy"?

I'm 100% understand that it's referencing Trump. I'm just not sure what stands for

[–] SayJess@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You got it right. TFG == That Fucking Guy. I don’t recall where I saw it first, but I love it.

[–] aphlamingphoenix@lemm.ee 2 points 8 months ago

This usually means "The Former Guy" in reference to Trump. It's a lot like calling Voldemort "He who shall not be named".

[–] xc2215x@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

If Trump agrees then go for it.

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 1 points 8 months ago

I’d agree with him but only if the LWV is in charge.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 1 points 8 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


When asked by NBC News’ “Meet the Press” moderator, Kristen Welker, about whether the two should debate in the fall in the likely event that they are the two major-party nominees, Newsom said, “100%.”

“This is ... pure projection on a guy who refused to debate in his own primary,” he added, saying it was “weakness masquerading as strength.”

But he said this month he wants to face off against Biden “immediately,” adding it would be “for the good of the country.”

Trump’s request to debate Biden came almost two years after the Republican National Committee voted to withdraw from events put on by the Commission on Presidential Debates, which has overseen the process for decades.

At the time, RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel said the group withdrew from debates because the commission “is biased and has refused to enact simple and commonsense reforms to help ensure fair debates.”

In November, the commission released the dates and locations of three presidential debates it hopes to host this fall.


The original article contains 268 words, the summary contains 167 words. Saved 38%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!