Kamala Harris has made a high risk, high reward, decision to accept a proposal to a second debate proposal by CNN, one that has been extended to both her and Donald Trump. Yes, Harris – by most accounts waxed Trump in the first debate, which makes one wonder, why she would risk doing another one. The answer is almost obvious due to the timing. Accepting a second debate is done with the Harris’ campaign’s knowledge that she needs all the momentum she can garner going into the election. The election will be close without regard to momentum and it poses the greater risk to her.
The proposed debate is set for October 22nd, just over two weeks out from the November election. Yes, Harris has a lot of momentum and her numbers, both in polling and in money are going up. And yet, it sure seems like Trump still maintains the edge in swing states. This is the problem she needs addressed and she cannot rely on the trend. To that end, the risk is high but the reward may be necessary to push her over the top.
Let’s move to CNN’s report given that CNN would host the debate and runs the risk of infuriating either side or – more likely, both. The parties are not the only ones taking some risk. CNN writes:
Harris tweeted Saturday that she “will gladly accept a second presidential debate” and that she hopes Trump “will join” her on October 23.
Yes, okay – it’s pretty late in the game (as Trump notes below) and probably of limited power. Still, the first debate went swimmingly for her but there is no guarantee a second would. Back to CNN’s report:
Trump on Saturday argued it was “too late” to have another presidential debate because Americans have begun casting their ballots in the 2024 election.
Yes, except no. The thing about “already casting ballots” means nothing about nothing because the fact is that – yes, plenty of people would have cast ballots at that point but far more, far more, will have yet to cast their ballots. Plenty more will remain, enough to decide the election without regard to the ballots cast.
Trump suggested last week that he might be open to participating in a third presidential debate following his September 10 face-off with Harris hosted by ABC in Philadelphia. “Maybe if I got in the right mood,” he told reporters during a stop in California, after previously posting on Truth Social, “THERE WILL BE NO THIRD DEBATE!”
Yes, but in order to have a third debate one must agree to a second and there’s every indication that Trump doesn’t want a second debate though he mused about it just a week ago. According to Axios:
The morning after their first debate, Trump told “Fox & Friends” he was “less inclined” to participate in another matchup with Harris. But he told reporters last week he could be open to another debate “if I got in the right mood.”
The right mood? What does that even mean? If only that he’s over the pain of the first debate? Whatever the “mood” may be, it certainly doesn’t appear to be rekindled any time soon. After all, Trump’s response has been “It’s too late,” and not say “We need to do it earlier – which sure seems like a warm invitation to Harris and CNN. Of course, both might accept said invitation and therein lies the problem.
Or so it would appear.
The other consideration is of course, as stated above, is whether Harris should even accept a second debate as she has. One could argue that she has nothing to win and a ton to lose given her stupefying supremacy in the first debate. Why not rest on that, bragging about kicking his asteroid in the first one?
Now that is probably easily answered in that she has far more to gain with another winning performance that might lead to more winning two weeks later. Given Trump’s strong and immovable base, it is probably less tempting to seek another debate – without regard for timing. Harris, on the other hand, will need to convince more swing voters to actually show up in November, and – of course, vote for her. Her reward is much higher than Trump’s and not just because she already won the first.
So, there it is. Given the trends, however, it might be that Trump should keep that invite on hold in case it looks like he needs that reward . Yes, except he already knows what it’s like to bottom out.
God Bless: I can be reached at [email protected]
She has a lot to gain, and more importantly, if she does come up against him again, how much will he have learned? How much will he have changed and adapted to her needling? How will his damaged personality be able to resist the bait she throws his way?
He won’t have changed, he can’t. He’s already shown us that, he is what he is. If he accepts an invitation to ‘debate’ again, he’ll lose like last time.
It will remain a ‘debate’ between a smart, confident, experienced legal prosecuter against an intellectually challenged multiply convicted, panicky, easily triggered criminal.
I’ll have popcorn ready.
“Let’s get ready to RUMBBBBLE!”
We’ll even let his buddy Joe Rogan call it. LMAO!🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Harris gets the chance to twist that stiletto she so effectively sunk into D—ump at their first debate. And yes Harris can effectively use the second debate as a vector “… to convince more swing voters to actually show up in November, and – of course, vote for her…” Figuratively, and debate wise, Harris could go for D—ump’s jugular and flail it all over the debate room ceiling, during the second debate. It’d be good viewing.
There’s even more to bait him with now: Springfield ring any bells? Making up stuff? The list goes on… Oh, wait, don’t forget the gems that will be available from Walz wiping out JDV.
Jeez the guy is terrified. Hell with it-V.P. Harris can just have a town hall event on national television. If nothing else it will highlight how much of a whiny-ass spoiled brat he is because you know his whining at that point will be epic.