Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Editor's Note: We're taking a brief hiatus for Columbus Day; be back in full swing Wednesday!
“The campaign’s final debates between President Donald Trump and Democrat Joe Biden were thrown into uncertainty Thursday… The chair of the nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates told The Associated Press that the final debate, scheduled for Oct. 22, was still slated to go on with both candidates present as planned. But next Thursday’s debate seemed to be gone, after the Trump team objected to the commission’s format change. The whipsaw day began with an announcement from the commission that the town hall-style affair set for Oct. 15 in Miami would be held virtually. The commission cited health concerns following Trump’s infection as the reason for the change…
“Trump, who is eager to return to the campaign trail despite uncertainty about his health, said he wouldn’t participate if the debate wasn’t in person. Biden’s campaign then suggested the event be delayed a week until Oct. 22, which is when the third and final debate was already scheduled. Next, Trump countered again, agreeing to a debate on Oct. 22 — but only if face to face — and asking that a third contest be added on Oct. 29, just before the election. But Biden’s advisers rejected squaring off that late in the campaign.” AP News
The right is critical of the commission, arguing that the campaigns should determine the format of the debates.
“Maybe the real solution is to get rid of the commission, as well as the moderators who are making themselves too much a part of the proceedings… we favor doing away with moderators and having microphones that give each candidate, say, two minutes to speak at a time. The candidates can use their time as they see fit before the microphone goes dead when the time runs out. The questions would come from the candidates and their campaigns, not some outside party who may have her own agenda. Surely the candidates know the best questions to put to their rivals…
“The Commission on Presidential Debates doesn’t control these events as a birthright. It’s a nonprofit, supposedly nonpartisan outfit run by Washington grandees and first sponsored debates in 1988. Its debate sponsorship has since become a tradition, but its judgment on moderators and timing is suspect. By the time of this year’s first debate on Sept. 29, millions of people had already voted. Its unilateral decision Thursday for a virtual debate is another example of its high-handedness. The candidates and parties ought to take back control over these debates.”
Editorial Board, Wall Street Journal
“The original design of the party-controlled general-election debate has slowly morphed from Republican Party-Democratic Party negotiation into something wholly different: a free-standing group of self-anointed, self-important Beltway Brahmins. Slowly but surely, the organization added staff, raised funds, expanded its ‘mission’ and deepened its own sense of entitlement… They have gradually accreted power: to pick sites, format and moderators… they announced their diktat without even a phone call to either candidate…
“The commission was last seen falling back in disarray, and the campaigns were negotiating, again as was intended, between themselves. Maybe the dates would be moved? I suggest the president name a stage and a date, name his own moderator and invite Biden to join him along with a moderator of the Democratic nominee’s choosing. The moderators could alternate questions and leave the men who would be president to talk to each other for 10 minutes at a time. Who knows what would happen? A debate might break out.”
Hugh Hewitt, Washington Post
Some argue that “Joe Biden may or may not be looking for a pretext to ditch the remaining two presidential debates, but one person still contagious with a pandemic virus ain’t exactly a pretext. In fact, it should be more or less assumed that anyone with an active and contagious COVID-19 infection doesn’t belong at a presidential debate, even if they’re a candidate…
“Why does the debate have to be in one place? We’re Zooming everywhere now, from kindergartens to Congress… Trump will likely push for an in-person town hall, of course, as he likes retail campaigning. But this isn’t a bad back-up plan, and under the circumstances, should be considered Plan A until we know more about the arc of Trump’s recovery.”
Ed Morrissey, Hot Air
Others note that “The CDC guidelines currently state that a patient who no longer has a fever, while not on fever-reducing medications, has improving symptoms, and is 10 days beyond symptom onset is no longer infectious. According to the CDC, this period may be extended in severe cases, but this does not apply to President Trump…
“Yesterday’s update from the president’s physician noted that he has been fever-free for four days and symptom-free for 24 hours. His bloodwork is also positive for detectable levels of antibodies to the COVID-19 infection. This makes it even less likely he is shedding virus [particles] capable of causing an infection. It also states that his oxygen saturation level and respiratory rate are all in the normal range… [Biden is] traveling to Nevada on Friday to campaign in person. With the CDC announcement yesterday confirming that the virus is airborne, this is a much bigger risk than being distanced on a stage with a recovered patient.”
Stacey Lennox, PJ Media
“[Trump is] right: Americans should see candidates off the cuff, responding to difficult questions. Biden, after all, has plainly been reading scripts even at ‘live’ remote events for weeks now. It’d be easy for his aides to slip him talking points outside the camera’s view — though he’d need to avoid reading things like ‘topline message,’ as he did in answering one reporter’s foreign-policy question. The CPD says it’s worried about safety, but Oct. 15 is (for Trump) well past the 10 days the CDC advises quarantining after COVID-19 symptoms appear. Alternately, the commission could’ve discussed Trump’s offer to move the final two debates back a week.”
Editorial Board, New York Post
The left worries that holding the debate in person may be too risky given Trump’s diagnosis.
The left worries that holding the debate in person may be too risky given Trump’s diagnosis.
“Donald Trump has tested positive for Covid-19, as have more than a dozen people close to him, including several sitting senators, members of his debate prep team, several members of his staff, his campaign manager and his own wife, first lady Melania Trump. The organizers of his next debate with Democratic nominee Joe Biden, which was scheduled for Thursday of next week, wisely announced a plan to move the debate to an online format. After all, who in their right mind would put a coronavirus patient in an enclosed room with other people, including vulnerable American voters and at least one other senior citizen, for at least 90 minutes of yelling[?]…
“While a virtual debate would be less optimal for Trump, it would be of far greater benefit to viewers. We would have an opportunity to actually hear each candidate articulate their vision for our country without being interrupted or bulldozed. It could be a real debate, not a contest of who can yell the loudest and talk over the other most effectively. If that puts Trump at a disadvantage because he is unable to debate ideas, well, the American people deserve to know that. And if the President truly does refuse to participate in the debate, then let Joe Biden show up alone and answer audience questions.”
Jill Filipovic, CNN
“The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends people who have Covid-19 stay away from others for at least 10 days following the appearance of symptoms, and notes that patients who — like Trump — were hospitalized and needed oxygen may be wise to self-isolate for [up to] 20 days. The debate date would seem to fall after the 10-day window but before the 20-day mark, based on what is publicly known about the onset of the president’s symptoms…
“The ability of the Commission for Presidential Debates and the advising Cleveland Clinic to conduct debates safely was called into question during the first event, during which Trump’s family declined to wear face masks throughout the proceedings. Wednesday night [at the VP debate], some Pence supporters — including his wife, Karen Pence — failed to follow masking protocol. And following the first debate, the city of Cleveland reported at least 11 people became infected; city officials said the cases originated from the pre-debate planning and setup.”
Ella Nilsen, Vox
“There is a little bit of precedent for presidents threatening to withdraw from a debate in order to change their terms. President George H.W. Bush refused to debate under the commission’s plans in 1992. But he eventually agreed to some debates. And Jimmy Carter refused to participate in the first debate in 1980 because it included independent John Anderson. I would say, though, in both the 1980 and 1992 cases, neither incumbent was rewarded for their intransigence… If he skips the debate and holds a rally instead, it could end up damaging him, considering how many voters don’t think he’s taken the coronavirus seriously enough. Such an event would seem to play right into that narrative.”
Geoffrey Skelley, FiveThirtyEight
“For many months now, Trump has required large swaths of the Republican Party to, alternately, either treat the coronavirus as no big deal, or acknowledge it as a fearsome foe, but only to the degree that this showcases how heroic his near-total triumph over it truly was. But most voters don’t see it this way. New polling shows large majorities don’t believe the virus is under control and want more government action against it even if it holds back the economic recovery. Voters think Biden (who embodies that position) will better handle the virus by lopsided margins… The truth of the matter is that a virtual debate would rupture the entire illusion that Trump’s reelection depends upon, simply by virtue of its very existence.”
Greg Sargent, Washington Post
“This unprecedented year has inspired great innovation. But the idea of hosting a virtual debate isn't one of them. Bringing people together remotely and televising it is not anything new, including in politics and presidential debates. On October 13, 1960, the third presidential debate between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon was hosted virtually. Kennedy was in New York, whereas Nixon was in Los Angeles, and the two were shown on a split screen… And in 1967, Robert F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan participated in a debate called ‘Town Meeting of the World.’ Moderator Charles Collingwood was in London with a group of students who asked questions. Reagan and Kennedy responded via satellite… The precedent of hosting virtual debates was made sixty years ago. Kennedy did it. Nixon did it. Why not Trump?”
Kerry Flynn, CNN
Potty Training: NASA Tests New $23M Titanium Space Toilet.
US News & World Report
