That's how this formula works, right? Isn't that the precedent Kamala Harris herself set when demanding Donald Trump stick to the debate he set with Joe Biden? A refusal to do any proposed debate indicates fear?
In this case, it could be true. Trump and Harris have agreed to two debates already, but Trump had worked on a September 4 Fox News debate before reopening negotiations with Harris after The Anointment. Harris has apparently refused to appear, Trump announced this morning:
Comrade Kamala Harris has just informed us that she will NOT do the FoxNews Debate on September 4th. I am not surprised by this development because I feel that she knows it is very difficult, at best, for her to defend her record setting Flip-Flopping on absolutely everything she once believed in, including her statements that THERE WILL BE NO FRACKING IN PENNSYLVANIA and her HORRIBLE Performance on the Border, our “Border Czar,” where millions of criminals and people from mental institutions and terrorists, have been allowed to pour into our Country, totally unchecked and unvetted. It’s called, and she LOVES IT, an OPEN BORDER!!!
In place of the debate, Trump will do a town-hall event on Fox, in Pennsylvania. And you'd better believe that fracking will be a topic of the conversation:
Rather than the debate on September 4th, I have agreed to do a Tele-Town Hall, anchored by Sean Hannity, for Fox. It will take place in the Great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania - Details to follow!
The shoe's on the other scaredy-foot, it seems. For someone who claimed to want to face off as soon as possible just three weeks ago, Harris seems oddly reluctant to get it on sooner rather than later:
At her Atlanta rally, Kamala Harris knocks Trump on his decision to back out of their debate.
— Yashar Ali 🐘 (@yashar) July 30, 2024
Harris: “So he won’t debate, but he and his running mate sure have a lot to say about me..”
“Donald…if you’ve got something to say, say it to my face.” pic.twitter.com/3WQosbIbJE
Gee, so much for bravado.
Anyway, there are likely two reasons for this refusal, and the first one is obvious. Harris doesn't want to do a debate on anything but the friendliest turf, and Fox News ain't it. Never mind that Bret Baier has always been a consummate professional in debate moderation, and that Trump himself had lots of gripes about Fox News over the years. Harris knows that she can't take the risk of moderators that will press for specifics on policies, which Baier certainly would do with both candidates in a debate. Her team probably got the hives just thinking about it. They will want to risk debates only on platforms that will at least give the possibility of easy treatment ... if indeed they risk debating at all.
The second reason relates to the first. Harris hasn't had time to even put up an issues page on her campaign website explaining her policy positions. They may never actually do that, but even if they do, she's only been the nominee for less than a month. Harris' handlers will need more time than that to prepare her to debate on a policy platform that hasn't yet been defined. A September 4 debate would step on any post-convention bump Harris gets, plus risks exposing her as an incoherent mess too early in the general-election cycle. They need more time than that to work on her -- and to determine if they need to generate a pretext to get her out of debating Trump entirely.
Get ready for a "beneath the dignity" argument related to Trump's status as a "convicted felon." This refusal at least preserves that option.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member