Las Vegas Review-Journal

Biden and Trump should debate, under one condition

- John Crisp John Crisp is a columnist for the Tribune News Service.

During an interview with Howard Stern on April 26, President Joe Biden said he would be “happy” to debate Donald Trump. Biden and his campaign should rethink and rescind this offer, or else they should attach a nonnegotia­ble condition on their participat­ion in any debate with Trump.

Hold that thought. First, let’s acknowledg­e that Biden would be at a significan­t disadvanta­ge in a debate with Trump. Modern political debates are about performanc­e, not issues. No one wins a debate by articulati­ng an organized, carefully conceived position, something nearly impossible to do during the two-minute segments and the 30-second rebuttals of the modern format.

In fact, the actual content of the candidates’ discourse hardly matters. The goals are the perfect sound bite, the stinging zinger and a gaffefree performanc­e. The worst shortcomin­g is to fail to get a word in edgewise. Candidates interrupt, talk over each other and refuse to yield the floor. Moderators are nearly powerless to manage the verbal free-for-all.

In a modern debate, Trump will always have the homefield advantage; the ground rules suit him. Interrupti­ng comes naturally to him. He blusters and struts. He’s a rhetorical bully; his discourse relies on bombastic assertion, generally unencumber­ed by facts, logic or deliberati­on.

We have to be honest about Biden, as well. Eloquence has never been his strong suit, and he’s always been prone to gaffes, misstateme­nts and exaggerati­ons. These oratorical faults do not diminish with age.

Even issues that are good for Biden — such as abortion — won’t help him in a debate:

Biden is part of a significan­t majority of Americans who support women’s right to reproducti­ve freedom. It should be a winning issue for Democrats. But it’s complicate­d. Some Americans want to prohibit abortion entirely. Others support women’s right to choose, but favor restraints. Fifteen weeks? Viability? Life of the mother? What about rape and incest? Should women who receive abortions or doctors who perform them be punished? What about women who cross state lines to have an abortion?

The pro-choice position that most Americans favor is a lot to explain and defend in two minutes, especially if you’re being interrupte­d every 30 seconds.

Trump, on the other hand, need only emphatical­ly assert that Democrats want to allow unhindered abortion up to the moment of birth and even beyond. This isn’t true, of course, but real-time fact checking cannot keep up with the pace of modern debates. Zinger.

One wonders why Biden should feel obligated to debate a man who does not show enough respect for him or for our republic to acknowledg­e that Biden actually won the presidency in 2020.

In short, a debate is a losing propositio­n for Biden. He has nothing to gain. But refusing to debate is also a loser.

Still, one wonders why Biden should feel obligated to debate a man who does not show enough respect for him or for our republic to acknowledg­e that Biden actually won the presidency in 2020.

Biden should agree to debate Trump under one condition with two parts: that Trump concede the 2020 election and agree, without equivocati­on, to accept the results of the 2024 election.

Trump wouldn’t have to admit that he embraced election denialism against the counsel of lawyers and aides who knew better; or admit that he orchestrat­ed a false electors scheme to subvert certificat­ion; or that he threatened election officials to “find” votes for him; or that he threatened his vice president if he certified the election; or that he encouraged a mob to march on the Capitol to stop the certificat­ion process.

No, all he has to do is admit that Biden won the 2020 election and agree to abide by the results in November.

This should be the price of admission into participat­ion in our republic, the minimum ante required of every player to get into the game. Anyone is free to run for president, but why should a candidate who refuses to commit to this essential democratic baseline be afforded the platform that a presidenti­al debate provides?

In short: No commitment to democracy, no debate.

Of course, Trump is unlikely to make this commitment. It’s a question of credibilit­y. But that’s his problem.

Biden should demand this commitment; so should every American. If Trump refuses, Biden has no obligation to debate him.

 ?? MARK MAKELA / THE NEW YORK TIMES ?? A woman watches a debate between then-president Donald Trump and Joe Briden on Sept. 29, 2020, at a watch party in Lititz, Pa.
MARK MAKELA / THE NEW YORK TIMES A woman watches a debate between then-president Donald Trump and Joe Briden on Sept. 29, 2020, at a watch party in Lititz, Pa.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States