4
4
0
"I have agreed with FoxNews to debate Kamala Harris on Wednesday, September 4th," Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social. "The Debate was previously scheduled against Sleepy Joe Biden on ABC, but has been terminated in that Biden will no longer be a participant, and I am in litigation against ABC Network and George Slopadopoulos, thereby creating a conflict of interest."
Trump agrees to debate Kamala Harris on Fox News
Posted from foxnews.comPosted in these groups: 
Political Opinions
Political Opinions
Posted 2 mo ago
Responses: 1
Premature. Trump agreed to this debate with Fox News, but Harris hasn't agreed to it.
https://apple.news/A5mjYqmYqQQGbMfrlhB2IIg
https://apple.news/A5mjYqmYqQQGbMfrlhB2IIg
Trump claims new debate deal as Harris urges sticking to existing date — The Washington Post
The Harris campaign was baffled by Trump’s claims that he had struck a deal for a new debate on Fox.
(2)
(0)
LTC Kevin B.
SFC (Join to see) - "Decorum dictates that as the challenged party Trump has his selection of moderator." Where did you find that? If that's the case, then it means Trump wanted the debate on ABC. And, now they are both the challengers; neither is an incumbent President.
(0)
(0)
COL Randall C.
Actually they seem to be the flip side of each other.
I looked at who the moderators would be for Fox News debate and they are listed as Bret Bair and Martha MacCallum. For the ABC debate, it would be David Muir and Linsey Davis.
Both David Muir and Bret Baier are pretty middle of the road. David tends to skew a bit to the left and Bret does the same on the right. However, both have long reputations of being factual and can ask difficult questions while remaining fair in both the presentation of the questions as well as the type of questions.
(Personal disclaimer - I watch both of them semi-regularly on their respective shows - ABC's World News Tonight (sometimes 20/20) and Fox News' Special Report).
I am less familiar with Linsey Davis and Marth MacCallum, but looking at various interviews they have online, both seem to be more partisan in their attitudes, but in previous interviews, both have been fair with the questions asked of the interviewee. Their bias shows in the selection of the questions and interviewees which are more aligned with the left or right respectively (of course, that could be the producers that influence that), but neither rise to what you you expect if a partisan interviewer were asking the questions.
Selecting questions that only focus on the negatives of one individual or the positives of another shows the bias of an interviewer (much like the 'neutral' fact-checking that focus solely/predominately on lies/context distortions from one 'side' but rarely the other).
Gotcha one-sided questions, questions that are based on an biased assumption, and repeating political talking points from one side or the other - those make you a partisan interviewer.
Someone asking a difficult question to someone does not make them biased or partisan, no matter how much the partisan viewer may object to 'their side' being targeted.
Finally, there is a big difference between the opinion shows and the on-air personalities for those shows and the "real news" individuals. While both outlets have a bias towards the left/right, assuming that ABC is full of nothing but clones of George Stephanopoulos is the same as assuming Fox News is nothing but Shawn Hannity clones. Same goes for assuming that all "news" is full of nothing but opinion hosts from the "news light" shows.
Having a debate with David and Bret as the moderators would be something I would be greatly for, but I would trust either of them (and to a lesser degree their announced co-moderators) to be an "old school journalist" asking tough questions about policy and the direction of the candidates, while at the same time pushing back against the "cultural bias" of the respective organizations turning them into biased/partisan moderators.
I looked at who the moderators would be for Fox News debate and they are listed as Bret Bair and Martha MacCallum. For the ABC debate, it would be David Muir and Linsey Davis.
Both David Muir and Bret Baier are pretty middle of the road. David tends to skew a bit to the left and Bret does the same on the right. However, both have long reputations of being factual and can ask difficult questions while remaining fair in both the presentation of the questions as well as the type of questions.
(Personal disclaimer - I watch both of them semi-regularly on their respective shows - ABC's World News Tonight (sometimes 20/20) and Fox News' Special Report).
I am less familiar with Linsey Davis and Marth MacCallum, but looking at various interviews they have online, both seem to be more partisan in their attitudes, but in previous interviews, both have been fair with the questions asked of the interviewee. Their bias shows in the selection of the questions and interviewees which are more aligned with the left or right respectively (of course, that could be the producers that influence that), but neither rise to what you you expect if a partisan interviewer were asking the questions.
Selecting questions that only focus on the negatives of one individual or the positives of another shows the bias of an interviewer (much like the 'neutral' fact-checking that focus solely/predominately on lies/context distortions from one 'side' but rarely the other).
Gotcha one-sided questions, questions that are based on an biased assumption, and repeating political talking points from one side or the other - those make you a partisan interviewer.
Someone asking a difficult question to someone does not make them biased or partisan, no matter how much the partisan viewer may object to 'their side' being targeted.
Finally, there is a big difference between the opinion shows and the on-air personalities for those shows and the "real news" individuals. While both outlets have a bias towards the left/right, assuming that ABC is full of nothing but clones of George Stephanopoulos is the same as assuming Fox News is nothing but Shawn Hannity clones. Same goes for assuming that all "news" is full of nothing but opinion hosts from the "news light" shows.
Having a debate with David and Bret as the moderators would be something I would be greatly for, but I would trust either of them (and to a lesser degree their announced co-moderators) to be an "old school journalist" asking tough questions about policy and the direction of the candidates, while at the same time pushing back against the "cultural bias" of the respective organizations turning them into biased/partisan moderators.
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
LTC Kevin B. - As usual I believe you're wrong sir. If I'm not mistaken Trump challenged Biden to debate, as such he had to accept Biden's requirements. It didn't help Biden much did it? In reality the more isolated Biden was, the more apparent it was that his elevator didn't go all the way to the top.
(0)
(0)
LTC Kevin B.
SFC (Join to see) - Still not buying it. Trump negotiated and agreed to those terms. If he didn't like the rules, he would have just said "No thanks". Nobody was going to force him into a debate.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google