• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who benefits more from an "open mic" debate?

S

Showtime586

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2020
Messages
9,334
Reaction score
12,124
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
This may be bit hard to accurately determine until the debate review is concluded.
On one hand, I can see why Trump wants an open mic. Trump is an arrogant ass who craves attention and lives and loves to hear himself talk. Trump will take every opportunity interrupt and has no concept of respect for others. This works for Trump and his low I.Q. MAGAS. They adore Trump's lowclass "rah-rah" bullshit no matter how dishonest and idiotic his comments are.
On the other hand, I am not exactly sure how this benefits Harris. She is likely hoping that Trump will say something stupid with an open mic. The thing is, Trump says enough stupid stuff when it is his legitimate turn to speak.
Maybe the goal from Harris is to provoke a "live TV Trump meltdown" for all to see. Harris is fully capable of pushing Trump's ego-manic buttons and we all know that Trump has little in the way of self control.
 
I'm not sure either but it sure is funny seeing them quibble over this with Trump's people wanting to cut mics, and Harris's team wanting to give him rope, so to speak.

I think Trump was neutered in the Biden debate...he looked awkward and silly, and said his bit and stopped talking, it was very un-Trump. I think his team loved it, because he did less damage than he normally would.
Meanwhile, the only reason he didn't tank that debate was because Biden tanked it harder with his age.
 
Showtime586 said:
This may be bit hard to accurately determine until the debate review is concluded.
On one hand, I can see why Trump wants an open mic. Trump is an arrogant ass who craves attention and lives and loves to hear himself talk. Trump will take every opportunity interrupt and has no concept of respect for others. This works for Trump and his low I.Q. MAGAS. They adore Trump's lowclass "rah-rah" bullshit no matter how dishonest and idiotic his comments are.
On the other hand, I am not exactly sure how this benefits Harris. She is likely hoping that Trump will say something stupid with an open mic. The thing is, Trump says enough stupid stuff when it is his legitimate turn to speak.
Maybe the goal from Harris is to provoke a "live TV Trump meltdown" for all to see. Harris is fully capable of pushing Trump's ego-manic buttons and we all know that Trump has little in the way of self control.
Click to expand...
I agree. But I also think she's confident enough to control the narrative even though he will truly show his ass by trying to talk over her and drown her out. Don't underestimate this woman. As a former prosecuter she knows how to own the room. trump know it, and he's scared shitless to go up against her.

I think she's right. Let him run his mouth, let the American people see what a whiney, lying, out of control schmuck he really is...
 
Perhaps, a better question is: who benefits from a greatly reduced ability (for anyone) to interrupt (talk over) the currently speaking candidate? It’s not the public listening to (or viewing) the debate, since they are unable to clearly hear the what the speaking candidate was trying to say. Obviously, if (when?) both candidates and possibly the moderator(s) are all speaking at the same time then the viewing public only hears chaos.
 
Trump hasn't had a good debate performance since 2016. He would probably lose and that's saying something considering Kamala is an atrocious public speaker and debater, especially in an environment that requires mental acuity and improvisation.
 
Mach said:
I'm not sure either but it sure is funny seeing them quibble over this with Trump's people wanting to cut mics, and Harris's team wanting to give him rope, so to speak.

I think Trump was neutered in the Biden debate...he looked awkward and silly, and said his bit and stopped talking, it was very un-Trump. I think his team loved it, because he did less damage than he normally would.
Meanwhile, the only reason he didn't tank that debate was because Biden tanked it harder with his age.
Click to expand...
And now Trump is the "old man" in the race.
 
Gozaburo said:
Trump hasn't had a good debate performance since 2016. He would probably lose and that's saying something considering Kamala is an atrocious public speaker and debater, especially in an environment that requires mental acuity and improvisation.
Click to expand...
Trump is by far the worst political debater and speaker that I have ever seen. Period.
 
Showtime586 said:
Trump is by far the worst political debater and speaker that I have ever seen. Period.
Click to expand...
I liked him in 15/16. Seeing him go from nothing to the number one guy after routing and totally destroying the entire Republican primary was pretty entertaining. Some of the clips from his debates against Hillary are legendary. Always nostalgic to go back and visit some of his greatest hits.

You might be one of these people who thinks political debates are about policy and finer points. They aren't. They're about clips and soundbites, which Trump was incredibly effective at generating in 15/16.
 
Showtime586 said:
This may be bit hard to accurately determine until the debate review is concluded.
On one hand, I can see why Trump wants an open mic. Trump is an arrogant ass who craves attention and lives and loves to hear himself talk. Trump will take every opportunity interrupt and has no concept of respect for others. This works for Trump and his low I.Q. MAGAS. They adore Trump's lowclass "rah-rah" bullshit no matter how dishonest and idiotic his comments are.
On the other hand, I am not exactly sure how this benefits Harris. She is likely hoping that Trump will say something stupid with an open mic. The thing is, Trump says enough stupid stuff when it is his legitimate turn to speak.
Maybe the goal from Harris is to provoke a "live TV Trump meltdown" for all to see. Harris is fully capable of pushing Trump's ego-manic buttons and we all know that Trump has little in the way of self control.
Click to expand...


There are 2 events that give me grave doubt. First, I thought that supporters would see who Trump really is on J6. But I was wrong. They rewrote the history and lied about all of it to this day.

The second was the town hall with Kaitlan Collins on CNN. He yelled and he thought the one who yells the loudest is right. He acted like the problem child he is. But his followers loved it.

I thought exposure would be convincing, but his supporters have it completely backwards.

He depends on chaos , he is not cogent. We're not talking about respectable candidates in 1988. Trump will lie and bluster and the base will love it.

Two candidates will stand on stage but it won't be a debate if trump doesn't have clear limits. A mic cutoff rule is fair and effective if applied to both candidates. Trump will still get mad and boarish, but Harris doesn't have to trigger it, he'll practically trigger himself.

A Trump shouting match is probably bad for both. If the debate is orderly and sober, Harris will 'win' just from being the one making sense.
 
Helix said:
I support shutting off the mics when it's the other person's turn. I also support real time fact checking.
Click to expand...
I don't think trump will ever agree to real time fact checking for the obvious reasons...I think his handlers know this is a dumpster fire waiting to happen....there's NO good answer here.
 
Showtime586 said:
On the other hand, I am not exactly sure how this benefits Harris.
Click to expand...

Pretty simple actually...

Because she will fact-check him in real time because she's actually preparing for the debate instead of playing Golf.

The last thing in the world Trump want's is to be corrected on live TV, especially by a woman.

WW
 
Gozaburo said:
I liked him in 15/16. Seeing him go from nothing to the number one guy after routing and totally destroying the entire Republican primary was pretty entertaining. Some of the clips from his debates against Hillary are legendary. Always nostalgic to go back and visit some of his greatest hits.

You might be one of these people who thinks political debates are about policy and finer points. They aren't. They're about clips and soundbites, which Trump was incredibly effective at generating in 15/16.
Click to expand...
I guess that all depends on your definition of "entertaining". If I want Trump type comedy and theatrics, I will simply watch WWE.
 
Showtime586 said:
And now Trump is the "old man" in the race.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that was a jarring twist.
Went form old/orange blowhard against a feeble Biden, to an old/orange blowhard vs energetic, happy, on-point Harris who is part of a great administration that didn't have 1/10th the stupidity of Trump's golf vacation aka time in the White House.
 
Helix said:
I support shutting off the mics when it's the other person's turn. I also support real time fact checking.
Click to expand...
Me too. Otherwise, you get simple chaos and everyone except the idiot MAGAS lose interest.
 
If either candidate interrupts or says anything at all during the other candidates time. The other candidate should get another 30 seconds.
 
craig said:
If either candidate interrupts or says anything at all during the other candidates time. The other candidate should get another 30 seconds.
Click to expand...
Well that would mean (to keep the debate under 3 days) they'd have to bring out the Gorilla Tape to stifle the insults coming out of the orange crazy man's mouth.... :LOL:
 
craig said:
If either candidate interrupts or says anything at all during the other candidates time. The other candidate should get another 30 seconds.
Click to expand...
I like it..you can do it if you want, but it costs you.
 
Showtime586 said:
And now Trump is the "old man" in the race.
Click to expand...
I forgot to ask if this was about a future debate, or has trump said something about the ABC debate?
 
soap box said:
I forgot to ask if this was about a future debate, or has trump said something about the ABC debate?
Click to expand...
This is about the ABC debate. He's trying to back out.
 
Jessie C said:
I don't think trump will ever agree to real time fact checking for the obvious reasons...I think his handlers know this is a dumpster fire waiting to happen....there's NO good answer here.
Click to expand...
I don't really care if there's a televised debate or not. I believe in debate, but I see no chance that an actual debate is going to happen on television. It's going to be an entertainment show. When I want entertainment shows, I go to YouTube and watch cooking shows, car stuff, and good musical performances, among other things. I might watch clips of the debate, but I doubt that I'll stay up late to watch the whole thing in real time.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Perhaps, a better question is: who benefits from a greatly reduced ability (for anyone) to interrupt (talk over) the currently speaking candidate? It’s not the public listening to (or viewing) the debate, since they are unable to clearly hear the what the speaking candidate was trying to say. Obviously, if (when?) both candidates and possibly the moderator(s) are all speaking at the same time then the viewing public only hears chaos.
Click to expand...
It's funny how this didn't become a problem until 2016......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom