Democrats are so confident in their presidential nominee that they can’t wait for him not to debate President Trump.
The New York Times has again published a piece calling for there to be no general election debates this fall. Previously, it was Thomas Friedman arguing that Joe Biden shouldn’t commit to any debates with Trump unless the president releases his tax returns and agrees to allow real-time “fact checkers” at the events.
At least that would give Biden an excuse. But this latest call for canceling the debates doesn’t even come with that.
Liberal author Elizabeth Drew wrote Monday in the New York Times that we should forego the debates this election because, well, who needs them?
“The debates have never made sense as a test for presidential leadership,” she said. “In fact, one could argue that they reward precisely the opposite of what we want in a president.”
The critique that presidential debates emphasize the superficial would hold more weight if liberals hadn’t for years raved about President Barack Obama’s ability to give a good speech.
Drew was sure to note that her recommendation didn’t come “out of any concern that Donald Trump will prevail over Joe Biden in the debates.” (Of course not.) But then she admitted that in 2016, the general election faceoffs between Trump and Hillary Clinton “became simply another tool in his arsenal.”
Which is it? Is Biden sure to excel in the debates, or are they “another tool” in Trump’s “arsenal”?
We know why liberals don’t want Biden to debate. Friedman admitted it in his own column last month that the first debate is likely to be when most voters start paying attention to the election. “That is not a good way for Biden to reintroduce himself to the American people,” he said.
The debates will matter, and they will likely influence votes. That Biden’s supporters are scared to see that happen is no reason to call them off.
