With President Joe Biden now locked in the basement, former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris are engaged in a two-step over where and when to debate. The standoff reflects poorly on both campaigns and on the state of American politics.
Trump has appeared in one debate — a June performance on CNN at which the doddering Biden sealed his own fate. Panicked Democrats responded by sending the president to the showers and replacing him with Harris. Trump and Biden had previously agreed to a second debate on Sept. 10 to be hosted by ABC. Now that Biden is out of the picture, however, Trump has other thoughts. He says he instead wants to debate Harris on Fox News on Sept. 4. The Harris campaign, of course, wants no part of that.
But here’s a radical thought. How about both? And how about adding Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to the stage, along with any other candidate who appears on enough state ballots to win the Electoral College? It is a blight on many modern-day politicians that they cower at the challenge of a potentially hostile audience or questioner. Insisting on only controlled or friendly environments — and embracing a two-party monopoly on the debate process — reveals a lack of intellectual confidence and is the opposite of statesmanship. It is certainly no way to build trust or an accord with voters.
Trump, to his credit, did agree to the Biden debate on CNN, a network not known for regarding the former president with warmth. He also recently spoke at the annual conference of the National Association of Black Journalists, many members of which are openly hostile to his existence. Harris, meanwhile, has been kept on a short lease since Democrats unceremoniously tossed Biden out the back door of the campaign bus.
The Harris campaign accused Trump of “running scared” regarding debates. It’s an odd charge from a candidate who hasn’t made an unscripted media appearance since being anointed the Democratic standard-bearer.
Trump should gain the upper hand and agree to the Sept. 10 ABC event and then insist on a second debate with Harris on Fox News. If the vice president refuses to attend the latter, it would speak volumes about her courage and mettle. If she’s hesitant to answer demanding questions about her record or agenda, she’s in the wrong line of work and is ill-prepared to handle the rigors of the toughest job in the world.
— Las Vegas Review-Journal