Joe Biden’s challenge to Trump for a debate has been met with skepticism from conservative circles. The terms set forth by the Biden campaign reveal a desire for highly controlled and managed debates, which is concerning to many observers. The demand for no live audience and strict microphone control seems to suggest a lack of confidence in Biden’s ability to handle unscripted interactions.
The exclusion of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. from participation is another eyebrow-raising aspect of Biden’s proposed terms. This exclusion seems to be a strategic move to limit the debate to just the two major-party candidates and prevent any potential disruptions or diversions.
Biden’s campaign also wants the debates to start earlier than the dates proposed by the Commission on Presidential Debates, likely to gain an advantage by presenting the candidates side by side well before early voting begins. The insistence on selecting networks that hosted both a Republican primary debate with Trump and a Democratic primary debate with Biden aims to create a perception of fairness, but it also limits the debate’s reach and diversity of viewpoints.
The demand for moderators selected by the broadcast host from their regular personnel further reinforces the desire for a controlled environment. This approach seeks to avoid any perceived bias or favoritism in the moderation, but it could also lead to criticisms of censorship or manipulation of the debate process.
Overall, Biden’s proposed terms indicate a cautious and risk-averse strategy, reflecting a campaign that is wary of potential pitfalls and seeking to minimize any unexpected challenges. The negotiations between the campaigns on these terms will likely be contentious, especially regarding issues like live audiences and network selection. Critics argue that Biden’s campaign is overly focused on protecting him rather than engaging in open and robust debate.
