Biden, Trump to Debate: Sort of.

Perhaps my expectations are much too low. For all I know, the Biden-Trump debates will be brilliant and illuminating. However, count me skeptical.

If true to form, Trump will be bombastic, long on self-glorification, clever name-calling, criticism of Biden, and accusations that Biden is using the Justice Department as a campaign weapon. Biden may parry poorly with Trump, appear defensive, and struggle to complete well-thought-out talking points.

Of course, no presidential debates have come close to the original Kennedy-Nixon debates for clarity, relevance, and insight into the readiness of the candidates to assume high office. I urge everyone to Google "Kennedy-Nixon Debates" and watch at least one of these contests to the conclusion. They were a masterclass in what a Presidential debate should be. Every comment was relevant and demonstrated each candidate's grasp of the issues. Back then, the viewer got valuable insight into each candidate's readiness for the job and how they would deal with the day's problems. John Kennedy and Richard Nixon set the bar so high that it took another decade and a half before any presidential candidate would subject himself to such scrutiny.

When the debates re-emerged, they were essentially contests in which candidates parried questions from news commentators and waited for opportunities to pounce with well-rehearsed quips or gotcha responses: Reagan to Mondale 1984: "I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience." Or, famously, in the 1988 Vice Presidential Debates. Democrat Lloyd Bentsen to Republican Dan Quayle: “Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy.”

Donald Trump will use sarcasm instead of savvy because political savviness requires a genuine understanding of American history and institutional mechanics. Trump is cunning but not particularly savvy. Joe Biden is well beyond his prime and has lost his proverbial edge. He has a treasure of institutional memory but instills only marginal confidence. The demanding routine of the presidential schedule sometimes seems more of a burden than an opportunity to demonstrate vigor.

Both men will look for opportunities to display their opponent's weaknesses rather than their own strengths. The debates will not be a pretty sight, and few will take any comfort from the knowledge that the world is watching. In the past, presidential debates have been mostly respectful. Not this time. The distaste both men have for one another will be palpable.

The first debate will take place barely a month from now, on June 27, at 9 p.m. Eastern Time, and will be moderated by CNN's Jake Tapper and Dana Bash. It will be followed by a second debate on September 10 moderated by ABC's Linsey Davis and David Muir.

As far as we know, the rules for the two debates have been well thought out. There will be no audience at either debate, so there will be no rehearsed cheer lines, catcalling, or booing. Each candidate's microphone will only be hot when he is talking, so there will be no interrupting or talking over a candidate's response to a question. There will be no theatrics, just questions and answers, with no opportunity for grandstanding or sarcastic side comments. We'll see how that works out.

The rules for the debate seem to favor President Biden. He has considerable historical memory to call upon, and he was in the proverbial room when so much history had been made in the past half-century. 

On the other hand, former President Trump is far more agile in grabbing the moment. He is apt to introduce President Biden's troubled son Hunter into the debate, even if the moderators haven't. He may accuse President Biden of benefiting from his son's alleged unsavory business dealings. I will not be surprised if Trump claims that none of his children would have ever leveraged his political prominence into such unsavory business dealings, his son-in-law’s hefty Saudi Arabian investor notwithstanding. Hunter Biden is a political liability for Biden, and I will be surprised if Trump doesn’t try to make Hunter a major issue. Trump may also try to entice the moderators into admonishing him so that he can accuse their networks of being biased and purveyors of fake news.

Biden does have some obvious vulnerabilities. He is past his prime, and it shows. He walks cautiously and often talks haltingly, and he is heavily involved in two wars in Ukraine and Gaza. These bloody conflicts are reported on in print and broadcast media every day. The United States is the primary provider of munitions in both conflicts, i.e., to the Ukrainians and to the Israelis.

Trump will claim that he would swiftly conclude both conflicts and that Biden has already demonstrated that he is incapable of doing that. Often wars unite a nation. Trump will use these conflicts to divide the country and charge Biden with being an inept leader, claiming that both wars would either have been avoided if he had been President or swiftly concluded had he been in charge. It is dicey for major political candidates to criticize American leadership when America is involved in a war.

Trump will force Biden to play defense concerning both conflicts. He will claim, but will not have to prove, that Russia would have never invaded Ukraine if he had been President, nor would Iran have ever unleashed Hamas in southern Israel if he were in the Oval Office. He doesn't have to prove these assertions, and Biden can't effectively refute them because they happened on his watch, not Trump's.

I do not hold out much hope that these debates will serve a constructive purpose. Debates are helpful when there are strict rules and fidelity to those rules by the debaters. Rules and adherence to rules by debaters keep debates from becoming unwieldy spectacles. Expect a spectacle.

Please share our weekly commentary with others who would enjoy receiving it.

Of Thee I Sing 1776. Subscribe here: https://oftheeising1776.substack.com/subscribe.

Recent podcasts have featured my commentary on Liz Cheney’s book, “Oath and Honor,” as well as my commentary regarding:

U.S. Representative Jim Jordan,

Brian Kemp and Those Republicans of Georgia,

The Trump Indictments,

The Fox Corp Settlement,

The CNN Trump Town Hall,

The Hunter Biden plea deal,

The New American Cult of Personality,

and my interviews with William Bratton, Retired Chief of Police, in New York City, Los Angeles, and Boston,

Rikki Klieman, Attorney, Network News Analyst, and best-selling author,

John Thoresen, Executive Director, Barbara Sinatra Children's Center,

Katherine Gehl, co-author of The Politics Industry and founder of the Institute for Political Innovation,

Jazz artist Ann Hampton Callaway,

Outlander author Diana Gabaldon,

AI Data Scientist Lawrence Kite,

Ryan Clancy, Chief Strategist of No Labels,

Senator Barbara Boxer,

Senator Joe Lieberman,

and Maryland Governor Larry Hogan. 

Become a Premium subscriber here: https://oftheeising1776.substack.com/subscribe.

Please consider our Of Thee I Sing 1776 Premium option. While my weekly column is always free, for just $5/month, you’ll also receive my annual ebook, “Essays For Our Time,” and my new Podcasts.

Subscribe here: https://oftheeising1776.substack.com/subscribe.

Novels by Hal Gershowitz