There’s No Room for Debate About Biden vs Trump Standoff

Really, why bother?

Five major broadcast and cable news networks have collaborated on a joint open letter urging President Biden and former President Donald J. Trump to participate in televised debates ahead of Election Day, according to an article in the New York Times.

The networks already participating are seeking endorsements from other leading national news organizations, including newspapers. A draft of the letter obtained by the Times is not final according to the paper’s sources; changes may be made to accommodate additional signatories. 

While the Commission on Presidential Debates has already announced dates, venues and eligibility requirements for 2024 general election candidates, they have not yet invited anyone to participate. Once the candidates are officially nominated by their parties, requests for participation will occur.

The draft version being circulated by these media organizations says “it’s not too early for candidates who expect to meet the eligibility criteria to publicly state their support for, and their intention to participate in, the commission’s debates planned for this fall.”

What a load of crap. If you need any further proof that media executives are more concerned about their industry than the welfare of the country, this proposal should cinch the case.

Why is it “not too early?” Do these organizations think that waiting until after the nominating conventions will hurt the electoral process or deny needed information to voters?

Or is it that, once again, the media are framing an issue in a way favorable to one particular candidate? 

It’s true that, once upon a time, presidential debates were the single largest opportunity for the public to learn about policy differences and judge the temperaments of the candidates, but this is no longer the case.

Candidate Trump says he’ll participate. Biden’s handlers have yet to commit.

So the Trumpsters are playing ‘fifth grade recess’ once again and taunting the President’s campaign. 

The question in my mind is, why would any sane person want to participate in a debate with a man who has already proven he’s unable to follow the rules, be truthful in his assertions, and refrain from hurling insults? Every statement–and I mean every–statement that comes out of his mouth includes an untrue presumption.

Take a gander at the part of the former president’s announcement concerning abortion on Monday, for instance. The bold phrases are easily proven to be untrue, or, as many people would say, lies. 

Following is a transcript excerpt via The Hill:

• “Many people have asked me what my position is on abortion and abortion rights, especially since I was proudly the person responsible for the ending of something that all legal scholars, both sides, wanted and, in fact, demanded be ended: Roe v. Wade. They wanted it ended.”

• “It must be remembered that the Democrats are the radical ones on this position because they support abortion up to and even beyond the ninth month. The concept of having an abortion in the later months, and even execution after birth — and that’s exactly what it is. The baby is born, the baby is executed after birth — is unacceptable, and almost everyone agrees with that.”

• “My view is now that we have abortion where everybody wanted it from a legal standpoint. The states will determine by vote or legislation or perhaps both, and whatever they decide must be the law of the land. In this case, the law of the state. Many states will be different. Many will have a different number of weeks or some will have more conservative than others, and that’s what they will be.”

This speech is an example of using two (easily glossed over by uncritical thinkers) suppositions to surround an outrageous claim. The format is taken from what I call the sandwich theory of lying. It’s aimed at Trump’s base, who the candidate believes will vote for him regardless of what he says, especially when making the “wrong” choice would be tantamount to endorsing infanticide.

The Biden campaign would be wise to a) ignore the taunts, as they are presently doing, b) ignore the premature urging of the media, and, c) if Trump makes it to September as a candidate, refuse to appear on the same stage.

At its essence, the former president’s campaign has little to nothing to do with policy (with the exception of tax cuts); it’s about making citizen participation into large-scale wrestlemania and getting even for 2020. This is not something that has opposing sides or requires further analysis. 

The only way to resolve this drama is to end it; end it at the ballot box in a big way. Halfway measures will just prolong democracy’s suffering. 

***

Wednesday News to Peruse

***

The power of unconscious thought via FrameLab

• Crime is another issue where we tend to be deeply affected by our unconscious beliefs. Many people instinctively think it is “common sense” to be tough on crime and impose draconian penalties. But the data says otherwise.

• Crime tends to be very high in states with “lock em’ up” laws — a dynamic that is rarely questioned. Decades of research shows that investing in education, creating economic opportunity and addressing other social factors has a much bigger impact on crime. Yet Democrats often copy Republicans in prescribing “tough” measures as the answer.

• Why? Because Americans have been conditioned to unconsciously believe “tough” is the solution to crime.

***

‘Forever chemicals’: Water supplies throughout California will exceed new national limits via CalMatters

• The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today unveiled the first nationwide limits on dangerous “forever chemicals” in drinking water, setting standards that will have sweeping, costly effects throughout California.

• Several thousand water systems around the country are expected to exceed the new limits for the chemicals, which have been linked to an array of diseases — including cancer and heart disease — and have contaminated people and animals worldwide, including newborns. 

• In California alone, traces of the compounds have been detected in water systems serving more than 25 million people, nearly a third in disadvantaged communities, according to an analysis by the Natural Resources Defense Council.

***

Earth sees hottest-ever March, the 10th record-breaking month in a row via The Washington Post

• The Earth just recorded its hottest March on record, the 10th month in a row to reach that feat, according to the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service.

• Fueled by a mix of human-caused warming and the El Niño climate pattern, the all-time monthly highs were observed both in the air and in the ocean’s waters, the Copernicus report said. The heat over the past 12 months has pushed global average temperatures to an unprecedented 1.58 degrees Celsius (2.84 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than preindustrial levels, and the hotter air over the Atlantic Ocean in particular could lead to an especially intense hurricane season, scientists warned.

• “It should be eye-catching — we are going toward uncharted territory,” said Gillian Galford, the lead of the Vermont Climate Assessment and a professor at the University of Vermont who reviewed the report. “It’s rather unusual we see such an increased temperature over months and seasons.”