Was tempted to call this “Debate 2: Electric Boogaloo” but a) A lot of Lemmy won’t get the OG reference. and 2) “Boogaloo” has been co-opted and carries an unfortunate connotation these days.
Also, while it’s Trump’s 2nd debate of the season, it’s Harris’s first…
It’s being run by ABC News at 9 PM Eastern time, 6 PM Pacific, I see MSNBC starts their coverage TWO HOURS EARLY. That’s a lot of air time to fill, guys. Good luck!
Live updates, how and when to watch, debate rules, etc. here:
Link to the first debate thread here:
https://lemmy.world/post/16973660
That’t it! Thanks for hanging with it everbody!
I can see where it looks that way, but you have to understand that Trump’s fanbase literally does not care.
Trump could start the debate by dropping trou and laying a turd live on stage and MAGA would go on about how he’s “owning ABC and the libs!”
The media would cut away and claim “Trump opened the debate by declaring his disdain for the process…”
I get it - I think at this point Trump could empty an AK47 magazine into an orphanage and his core voters wouldn’t give a fuck.
I’d imagine there is a good chunk of silent “left-of-Republican” market though - people who have voted red because that’s what they’ve always done, maybe because their household is overwhelmingly Republican but they’re ready to break ranks, or even those who boarded the meme train in 2013 or 14 but are ready to get off.
I suppose an awkward analogy is being in a group of twenty people trying to get in to a bar with one or two cunts who are beyond mangled - the sensible ones looking at them and thinking “yeah I’ve stuck with them this far, but maybe I can make a change and enjoy the rest of the night with people who are largely sensible”.
If the Cheneys of all people can jump ship, there’s hope.
Agree, however if debates do have any impact on an election (Biden dropping out being an exception) it’s to sway disengaged and swing voters. So Trump just plays to his base I think that would qualify as a loss for him.
Disengaged voters aren’t watching the debate, similarly I don’t see how anyone is undecided between Trump and Harris. Maybe undecided between voting and not voting, but there’s no way someone looks at two radically different candidates and goes “You know, I could really vote for either one…”
Don’t think of them as undecided, think of them as indifferent. Like if I had to vote in a poll for my favorite NBA team. I don’t really follow the NBA, so I might pick a team if I was forced to but I don’t really care. If there was a player witn particular charisma, though, maybe I might adopt that team.
People who are just focusing on getting by might think of politics as just too much noise, stuff that doesn’t affect them at all. These voters are not watching the debate, but they are seeing five-second sound bites on social media. The right little quip might be just enough to convince one of these low-engagement voters to show up.
They won’t watch, but the debate can attract the attention of people who don’t ordinarily think about politics but start to realize there’s an election coming up. It’s a broad group that I don’t think you can generalize as broadly as you are (unless you’re using the term “disengaged” to describe only the “refuse to participate in any way” camp).
Similarly, undecided is more likely to describe people who haven’t decided if they will vote or not - either side winning and otherwise forfeited vote is a good thing for their campaign. But I also think it’s incorrect to assume there’s people not still on the fence about the candidate - plenty of “I like Harris but I am not sure if she’s good for the economy” voters, etc.