World How to avoid another Trump-Biden 'car-crash' debate
The Election That Could Break America
If the vote is close, Donald Trump could easily throw the election into chaos and subvert the result. Who will stop him?There is a cohort of close observers of our presidential elections, scholars and lawyers and political strategists, who find themselves in the uneasy position of intelligence analysts in the months before 9/11. As November 3 approaches, their screens are blinking red, alight with warnings that the political system does not know how to absorb. They see the obvious signs that we all see, but they also know subtle things that most of us do not. Something dangerous has hove into view, and the nation is lurching into its path.
Among those who tuned for the first US presidential debate, there is a clear and growing consensus that the first on-air face-off between Donald Trump and Joe Biden was a mess.
For some 90 minutes, the candidates shouted, bickered and largely ignored the topics at hand, despite repeated pleas from moderator Chris Wallace.
And it looks like the Commission on Presidential Debates - the nonpartisan charity that sponsors the events - agrees. On Wednesday, the group said the first debate had "made clear" that additional structure must be added for the remaining two match-ups. One possible change being considered is cutting candidates' microphones if they try to interrupt each other, according to CBS News.
Joe Biden Tries to Close the Deal with Latino Voters, As Florida Remains a Headache
He'll win the Latino vote—but will it be enough to win in November?That's the story of Hillary Clinton, who looked set to win four years ago, until she didn't.
With two weeks until Mr Trump and Mr Biden are back in the ring, what could these next debates look like?
Mute the candidates?
Typically, presidential debates give voters a chance to hear what the candidates have to say before casting their ballots. During's Tuesday event, however, there was a prevailing wish among those watching for the two men on stage to be quiet.
As the debate wore on, social media was flooded with requests - from voters, pundits and journalists - for moderators to be given the power to selectively mute the candidates and prevent them from jumping in out of turn. Though both nominees were guilty of interruptions, President Trump was by most accounts the more egregious offender, cutting in some 73 times, according to CBS news.
The controversial 1994 crime law that Joe Biden helped write, explained
Biden has taken credit for the 1994 crime law. But critics say the law contributed to mass incarceration.If you ask some criminal justice reform activists, the 1994 crime law passed by Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton, which was meant to reverse decades of rising crime, was one of the key contributors to mass incarceration in the 1990s. They say it led to more prison sentences, more prison cells, and more aggressive policing — especially hurting Black and brown Americans, who are disproportionately likely to be incarcerated.
This change is now said to be at the top of the list of those proposed by the debate commission, according to US media.
The calls for muting seem to be a product of the Zoom-era brought about by the coronavirus pandemic. When working from home and using video-chat apps, such as Zoom, we're now able to mute ourselves and turn the volume down on colleagues - a tool that could conceivably lend a hand to a moderator desperate to maintain calm.
A better moderator?
Many who were unhappy with Tuesday's performances expressed dissatisfaction with moderator Chris Wallace.
From the outset, the Fox News anchor struggled to maintain control of the candidates, resorting to desperate appeals to Mr Trump to stop talking and allow his opponent to finish, at one point shouting for the president to "Let him [Mr Biden] answer!".
Trump, Biden get nasty in first presidential debate
Trump, Biden get nasty in first presidential debate President Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden held a fiery first presidential debate Tuesday night, sparring over everything from the Supreme Court nomination, coronavirus and Biden's sons, with moderator Chris Wallace of Fox News admonishing Trump several times for interrupting and deploring both candidates to let the other speak. The first of three scheduled showdowns between Trump, 74, and Biden, 77, devolved into attacks on Hunter Biden, smarts and schoolyard name-calling.
But many defended him, saying that dealing with this set of candidates - namely Mr Trump - was a tough order for anyone.
"I don't blame Chris Wallace at all. He's a stellar, stand-up journalist," presidential historian Laura Ellyn Smith told the BBC. "He did well with the Clinton-Trump debate in 2016, he was a good choice to moderate. He was given an almost impossible task, straight out of the gate."
Speaking to the New York Times the morning after, Mr Wallace said he was saddened by the way the evening had unfolded.
"I never dreamt that it would go off the tracks the way it did," he said.
For the next two debates, Mr Wallace will pass the torch. First, to Steve Scully, a political editor with the C-SPAN television network and then to Kristen Welker, White House Correspondent for NBC News.
Will they have a better chance of keeping the candidates in check? That is a great unknown. As a conservative veteran from Mr Trump's favourite network, praised for his work as moderator in the last presidential election, Mr Wallace was thought to have as good a chance as any. But even he proved no match for the chaotic collision this year.
Rafael Nadal coasts into the French Open third round
The 12-time French Open champion said before the tournament that he expected this Roland Garros to be his biggest challenge because of the slow conditions and heavy balls. But so far he has looked in fine fettle and American McDonald was allowed just four games in a 6-1 6-0 6-3 victory for Nadal.
A new format?
This change is already certain. The next debate, on 15 October in Miami, Florida, will be in a town-hall format, where candidates take questions from voters instead of journalists. Here, the environment is generally more casual. In pre-coronavirus elections past, candidates have been seated within arms' reach of voters, instead of protected behind a podium on stage.
The town-hall style may serve to benefit these particular candidates, Ms Smith said, adding that it might bring some civility. "In the first debate, they were just looking at Chris Wallace, the room otherwise is pretty dark," she says.
This time, neither Mr Biden nor Mr Trump will get to steamroll the moderator - they'll have to answer directly to voters.
"It might inspire a bit more confidence and might bring a bit more pride back into the format of debate," Ms Smith said.
Call them off?
Some voters and pundits alike who tuned into the first debate think the events aren't worth saving. As Tuesday's contest was unfolding, Twitter was alighting with pleas to cancel the remaining match-ups entirely.
"I wouldn't be surprised if this is the last presidential debate between the president of the United States and the former vice-president of the United States," CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer said minutes after the face-off concluded.
The Donald Trump v. Joe Biden Debate Turned Stomachs But Didn't Change Minds in This Battleground County
Last night's raucous presidential debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden did little to change the minds of voters in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, a county that the president won in 2016 after it went twice for Barack Obama.David Thole, of Wright Township, tuned in to the debate hoping to hear about the issues, especially from Biden, but was disappointed, like many Americans, with the dearth of civility as the candidates interrupted and talked over each other.
"For the sake of democracy, cancel the Trump-Biden debates", read the headline of a New York Times column by Frank Bruni. The call was echoed by the Washington Post, Slate and the Atlantic magazine.
But the debates still have their defenders, including Ms Smith.
"I think that would be a step in the wrong direction [to cancel]. It would be admitting defeat at this point," she said. "The debate has been a helpful way in the past to demonstrate candidates' skills. To see policy, even, in a bit more detail."
She added: "I don't think you should ever cut back on dialogue in democracy, even if it's loud."
The remaining debates will proceed as scheduled on 15 October and 22 October, with new rules from the debate commission to be announced this week.
But the vice-presidential candidates - Vice-President Mike Pence and California Senator Kamala Harris - will be squaring off first in their debate on 7 October. It is expected to be less raucous than that of their running mates.
The next presidential debate will be virtual — but Trump says he won’t attend .
Whether the debate will proceed is in doubt, as the president called a remote debate a waste of time.Following President Donald Trump’s recent Covid-19 diagnosis, the next presidential debate is scheduled to be conducted remotely. Whether it will be held is in doubt, however, with Trump saying on Fox Business Thursday, “I’m not going to waste my time on a virtual debate.