Previously Published in The Messenger
As we all know, the first presidential debate held in late June is what single-handedly changed the race. Our editorial from the June 27 edition of The Messenger said exactly that. President Biden’s (D-DE) sad mental state left much to be desired of any leader of any party, but Democrats decided that the best way to circumvent a guaranteed loss in November, along with losing the House and Senate, was to force Biden to step down, nullify the primary results, throw in a new standard bearer in Vice President Kamala Harris (D-CA), and continue with the campaign as if the most significant alteration in a presidential ticket since 1968 didn’t just happen.
It’s our opinion that if Biden’s candidacy, according to the left, didn’t count and was not representative of the best the party could offer its staunchest supporters and down-ballot partners, then the first debate certainly doesn’t count either.
The debates were mostly set when Biden was still on the ticket. As if the last-minute switch wasn’t a curveball enough to the electorate, it also put a large question mark over the schedule of the debates. The second presidential debate is slated for Tuesday, September 10, in Philadelphia, hosted by ABC News. The vice presidential debate is set for Tuesday, October 1, in New York, hosted by CBS News.
In reality, the second debate becomes the first. Although it’s almost impossible to make the case that Democratic Party business was conducted legitimately, it doesn’t negate the fact that we’ve essentially reset the clock on the entire election.
Trump and Harris should continue with the September 10 debate as planned. As per tradition, there should be a town hall-style debate between the two candidates, bookended with a third classic-style debate in October.
It’s neither candidates’ fault that CNN hosted a historically-early June 27 debate that sent the Democratic ticket into a downward spiral. Is there a possibility this was done by design to start the national tirades against Biden, or were we all just eager to watch the two beat each other up from behind the podiums?
The Democrats might have procured themselves a do-over by ousting Biden, much to the suggestions of deep-pocketed donors who would not release their exorbitant campaign funds unless Biden was sent packing. But Harris shouldn’t get off that easy. She should have to compete with Trump in the first debate between themselves.
Harris might be the second Democratic candidate in this election, but the second debate cannot serve as the second regarding the June disaster. The first debate needs to be recognized only for posterity and not for meeting actual thresholds of a typical presidential campaign.
Any hesitation from the Harris team needs to be met with vocal disagreement. It’s one thing to fundamentally change the race because your side wasn’t doing well with the candidate who received a record eighty-one million votes in 2020, but it’s another to pass off the past of an alternate timeline as one that dictates the path forward.
Three debates. There is no debating that.