Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Harris can receive guarantees that the moderators will stick to rules both candidates agree on, why not have the second debate on Fox?

But I think that the first debate should be held on the previously agreed-upon network, because it has precedence. First dibs, if you will. To spurn them would be rude and burning some bridges. I also reject Trump's claim that because it's a different debate opponent, the deal is off. That's just a coward's excuse and we all know it.

No dibs. There have been too many debates on leftward media stations in the last 30 years. Time to balance that out. The softball questions to one side have become ridiculous to the point of everyone rolling their eyes when PBS or NPR host it.

But Trump already agreed to the second debate. What difference does it make that it’s against Biden or Kamala? I’m trying to understand Trump’s reasoning. By moving it to Fox, it looks like he was afraid of Kamala and now wants to engineer a more favorable outcome because he is afraid of Kamala!

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand the point of another debate. If you don't know who you are voting for by now then you probably shouldn't vote

Anonymous wrote:Why does Trump get to dictate the terms of the debate? Trump already agreed to terms with Biden, so since he wants to change those terms, I think it’s because he’s afraid of Kamala. I can’t see what the difference is in the previous agreement with Biden versus Kamala.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harris is a coward. She needs to show up
and answer questions from people who don’t kiss her a$$.

She has no need to debate on fox news of all places. Find a network that did not traffic in lies about the last election.

She is just scared. Cannot even unburden what has been burdened.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Harris can receive guarantees that the moderators will stick to rules both candidates agree on, why not have the second debate on Fox?

But I think that the first debate should be held on the previously agreed-upon network, because it has precedence. First dibs, if you will. To spurn them would be rude and burning some bridges. I also reject Trump's claim that because it's a different debate opponent, the deal is off. That's just a coward's excuse and we all know it.

No dibs. There have been too many debates on leftward media stations in the last 30 years. Time to balance that out. The softball questions to one side have become ridiculous to the point of everyone rolling their eyes when PBS or NPR host it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Harris can receive guarantees that the moderators will stick to rules both candidates agree on, why not have the second debate on Fox?

But I think that the first debate should be held on the previously agreed-upon network, because it has precedence. First dibs, if you will. To spurn them would be rude and burning some bridges. I also reject Trump's claim that because it's a different debate opponent, the deal is off. That's just a coward's excuse and we all know it.

No dibs. There have been too many debates on leftward media stations in the last 30 years. Time to balance that out. The softball questions to one side have become ridiculous to the point of everyone rolling their eyes when PBS or NPR host it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Harris can receive guarantees that the moderators will stick to rules both candidates agree on, why not have the second debate on Fox?

But I think that the first debate should be held on the previously agreed-upon network, because it has precedence. First dibs, if you will. To spurn them would be rude and burning some bridges. I also reject Trump's claim that because it's a different debate opponent, the deal is off. That's just a coward's excuse and we all know it.

No dibs. There have been too many debates on leftward media stations in the last 30 years. Time to balance that out. The softball questions to one side have become ridiculous to the point of everyone rolling their eyes when PBS or NPR host it.

Sorry buddy, Trump agreed to it. Going back on his word is not Presidential.

If he hadn't agreed to it, I agree with you that Fox would be a good first debate network. It can still be a second.

He agreed to debate Joe Biden.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Harris can receive guarantees that the moderators will stick to rules both candidates agree on, why not have the second debate on Fox?

But I think that the first debate should be held on the previously agreed-upon network, because it has precedence. First dibs, if you will. To spurn them would be rude and burning some bridges. I also reject Trump's claim that because it's a different debate opponent, the deal is off. That's just a coward's excuse and we all know it.

No dibs. There have been too many debates on leftward media stations in the last 30 years. Time to balance that out. The softball questions to one side have become ridiculous to the point of everyone rolling their eyes when PBS or NPR host it.

Sorry buddy, Trump agreed to it. Going back on his word is not Presidential.

If he hadn't agreed to it, I agree with you that Fox would be a good first debate network. It can still be a second.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Harris can receive guarantees that the moderators will stick to rules both candidates agree on, why not have the second debate on Fox?

But I think that the first debate should be held on the previously agreed-upon network, because it has precedence. First dibs, if you will. To spurn them would be rude and burning some bridges. I also reject Trump's claim that because it's a different debate opponent, the deal is off. That's just a coward's excuse and we all know it.

No dibs. There have been too many debates on leftward media stations in the last 30 years. Time to balance that out. The softball questions to one side have become ridiculous to the point of everyone rolling their eyes when PBS or NPR host it.

Sorry buddy, Trump agreed to it. Going back on his word is not Presidential.

If he hadn't agreed to it, I agree with you that Fox would be a good first debate network. It can still be a second.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Harris can receive guarantees that the moderators will stick to rules both candidates agree on, why not have the second debate on Fox?

But I think that the first debate should be held on the previously agreed-upon network, because it has precedence. First dibs, if you will. To spurn them would be rude and burning some bridges. I also reject Trump's claim that because it's a different debate opponent, the deal is off. That's just a coward's excuse and we all know it.

No dibs. There have been too many debates on leftward media stations in the last 30 years. Time to balance that out. The softball questions to one side have become ridiculous to the point of everyone rolling their eyes when PBS or NPR host it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does Trump get to dictate the terms of the debate? Trump already agreed to terms with Biden, so since he wants to change those terms, I think it’s because he’s afraid of Kamala. I can’t see what the difference is in the previous agreement with Biden versus Kamala.

Kamala will crush trump. She will not suffer his foolish non stop lying.

Anonymous wrote:Why does Trump get to dictate the terms of the debate? Trump already agreed to terms with Biden, so since he wants to change those terms, I think it’s because he’s afraid of Kamala. I can’t see what the difference is in the previous agreement with Biden versus Kamala.