Opinion: Why next week's Biden-Trump showdown is so new

Next week's debate between Joe Biden and Donald Trump will be new for many reasons. This will be the first debate between a current American president and a former president. This will be the first time with a convicted felon. This will be the first time that either major party has officially chosen a candidate. But perhaps more importantly, it harkens back to an earlier era of presidential campaigning, when debates were neither customary nor expected, and when they did occur, they did so to meet the specific needs of candidates, rather than as a form of public service.

We expect presidential debates in a fairly specific and consistent format, three matchups between the candidates (plus one between the vice-presidential candidates) in September and October, with a fairly neutral and impartial moderator and a silent audience. There is a fairly high threshold for third-party candidates to be included, and only one Ross Perots campaign in 1992 qualified. These were the rules established by the nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates in 1988, and the two major parties generally adhered to them. As a result, over nearly four decades, the debates have become a beloved tradition, seen as serving an important public function of informing voters and providing an example of civil discourse for democracies around the world.

Yet the tradition frayed in 2020 amid the COVID-19 pandemic and the unhinged behavior of veteran Trump moderator Chris Wallace, who regretted losing control of the first debate. And Trump and Republicans signaled quite early in the 2024 cycle that they did not intend to adhere to the rules established by the commission.

At its peak, the Commission on Presidential Debates represented the institutionalization of a campaign tool, which is all well and good, but certainly not necessary. In other circumstances, debates are neither obligatory nor inevitable.

The reality is that any direct engagement between campaigns, whether a military battle or a candidate debate, carries risks. A candidate with a large lead has little reason to jeopardize it, which is why Trump has not participated in any of the Republican primary debates for this year's election. In the absence of a commission-type institution, the only time debate is likely to take place is when both sides view the risks as acceptable and the potential benefits as worthwhile.

And it's a good way to think about past presidential debates. Dwight Eisenhower and Adlai Stevenson could have held a televised debate in 1952 or 1956, but Eisenhower was well ahead in both contests and a bit awkward on camera. A debate presented only risks for him. Likewise, there was no real reason for Lyndon B. Johnson to debate Barry Goldwater in 1964 or for Richard Nixon to debate George McGovern in 1972; why jeopardize a track?

The first televised presidential debate was between Nixon and John F. Kennedy in 1960, and it seemed like a good bet for both campaigns. Both candidates appeared eloquent, knowledgeable and quick-witted, and the election appeared close. Both had reason to believe that a debate could give them the edge they needed to win the competition. The general belief that Nixon had a bad image on television and that it might have cost him the election is probably at least part of the reason he had no interest in debating when he ran again in 1968.

The world before the Commission on Presidential Debates actually looks a lot like intraparty primary debates, which are traditionally less formal. Sometimes, news agencies organize these debates, inviting candidates who interest them. Sometimes they were created by only two or three candidates and excluded many others, as when Ronald Reagan challenged George HW Bush in a one-on-one debate, ignoring the other candidates, shortly before the presidential primaries. New Hampshire in 1980. On occasion, we have even witnessed cross-party debates during primary season, as happened between Reagan and Robert F. Kennedy in 1967 or between Ron DeSantis and Gavin Newsom the year last.

But no matter what happens in next week's debate, Biden offered it for strategic campaign purposes. On the one hand, by limiting the debate to him and Trump, and bypassing the commission, Biden could well have avoided the participation of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., which could have elevated the stature of independent candidates and taken away votes to the president. . Biden may well be hoping for a repeat of his March State of the Union address, in which he enjoyed a strong performance despite low expectations and effectively silenced some critics.

Biden's team also insisted on no in-person hearing and a neutral moderator who could cut off the microphone if a candidate exceeds their allotted time. As Frank J. Fahrenkopf Jr., co-chairman of the Commission on Presidential Debates, said, the president offered very favorable terms, perhaps more favorable than a commission-brokered debate would have been, and Trump rushed to agree to these terms, convinced he could crush Biden one-on-one.

Presidents running for re-election often perform poorly in their first debate (think Barack Obama in 2012 or George W. Bush in 2004, for example), at least in part due to overconfidence and fact that they were rarely questioned directly in the Oval Office. But both Biden and Trump will be vulnerable to it in next week's debate.

What's important to remember is that presidential debates are no longer an automatic part of the campaign environment. These candidates debate because each of them does not see it as an obligation, but rather as something that is in the interest of their campaign. And they each acknowledge that this election could go either way.

Seth Masket is professor of political science and director of the Center on American Politics at the University of Denver.

Sources 1/ https://Google.com/ 2/ https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2024-06-21/joe-biden-donald-trump-debate The mention sources can contact us to remove/changing this article

What Are The Main Benefits Of Comparing Car Insurance Quotes Online

LOS ANGELES, CA / ACCESSWIRE / June 24, 2020, / Compare-autoinsurance.Org has launched a new blog post that presents the main benefits of comparing multiple car insurance quotes. For more info and free online quotes, please visit https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/the-advantages-of-comparing-prices-with-car-insurance-quotes-online/ The modern society has numerous technological advantages. One important advantage is the speed at which information is sent and received. With the help of the internet, the shopping habits of many persons have drastically changed. The car insurance industry hasn't remained untouched by these changes. On the internet, drivers can compare insurance prices and find out which sellers have the best offers. View photos The advantages of comparing online car insurance quotes are the following: Online quotes can be obtained from anywhere and at any time. Unlike physical insurance agencies, websites don't have a specific schedule and they are available at any time. Drivers that have busy working schedules, can compare quotes from anywhere and at any time, even at midnight. Multiple choices. Almost all insurance providers, no matter if they are well-known brands or just local insurers, have an online presence. Online quotes will allow policyholders the chance to discover multiple insurance companies and check their prices. Drivers are no longer required to get quotes from just a few known insurance companies. Also, local and regional insurers can provide lower insurance rates for the same services. Accurate insurance estimates. Online quotes can only be accurate if the customers provide accurate and real info about their car models and driving history. Lying about past driving incidents can make the price estimates to be lower, but when dealing with an insurance company lying to them is useless. Usually, insurance companies will do research about a potential customer before granting him coverage. Online quotes can be sorted easily. Although drivers are recommended to not choose a policy just based on its price, drivers can easily sort quotes by insurance price. Using brokerage websites will allow drivers to get quotes from multiple insurers, thus making the comparison faster and easier. For additional info, money-saving tips, and free car insurance quotes, visit https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/ Compare-autoinsurance.Org is an online provider of life, home, health, and auto insurance quotes. This website is unique because it does not simply stick to one kind of insurance provider, but brings the clients the best deals from many different online insurance carriers. In this way, clients have access to offers from multiple carriers all in one place: this website. On this site, customers have access to quotes for insurance plans from various agencies, such as local or nationwide agencies, brand names insurance companies, etc. "Online quotes can easily help drivers obtain better car insurance deals. All they have to do is to complete an online form with accurate and real info, then compare prices", said Russell Rabichev, Marketing Director of Internet Marketing Company. CONTACT: Company Name: Internet Marketing CompanyPerson for contact Name: Gurgu CPhone Number: (818) 359-3898Email: [email protected]: https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/ SOURCE: Compare-autoinsurance.Org View source version on accesswire.Com:https://www.Accesswire.Com/595055/What-Are-The-Main-Benefits-Of-Comparing-Car-Insurance-Quotes-Online View photos