President Biden has offered to debate former President Donald J. Trump at least twice before the upcoming election, starting as early as June, but has snubbed the nonpartisan organization that has overseen presidential debates since 1988, according to a letter obtained by The New York Times.
The Biden campaign’s letter unveils the president’s conditions for a face-to-face confrontation with Mr. Trump, a challenge Mr. Trump has openly pursued. Biden and his team are pushing for debates to start well before early voting begins in September, in a controlled TV studio environment where microphones are cut off when a speaker’s time expires. They demand a setting with only the candidates and the moderator—no live audience to energize Trump and no inclusion of third-party candidates such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Biden’s move is a calculated risk as he trails Trump in numerous battleground-state polls and struggles to convince voters of his leadership, particularly regarding the economy. The letter, signed by Biden’s campaign chair, Jennifer O’Malley Dillon, was addressed to the Commission on Presidential Debates, signaling Biden’s refusal to participate in the commission’s scheduled debates on Sept. 16, Oct. 1, and Oct. 9.
Instead, Biden proposes debates hosted by news organizations, and has recorded a video to affirm his intent to face Trump. This shift allows the Biden and Trump teams to directly negotiate debate terms with networks.
O’Malley Dillon suggests the first debate take place in late June after Trump’s New York trial and Biden’s G7 summit return, and a second in early September to influence early voting. The Biden campaign seeks one vice-presidential debate in late July after the Republican National Convention.
Early debates are critical for Biden, given the importance of early votes. Historically, early voting has favored Democrats. For example, in 2020, early votes via mail were pivotal for Biden, overcoming Trump’s Election Day voter turnout strategy.
“The commission’s failure to schedule meaningful debates for all voters shows the limitations of their outdated approach,” O’Malley Dillon writes, highlighting Biden’s mistrust of the commission’s ability to manage fair debates, referencing grievances from 2020 where Trump, maskless and COVID-positive, appeared under the weather during a debate.
The Biden campaign’s proposal entails only two debates versus the commission’s three and insists on no live audience, suspecting disruptions like those from Trump’s supporters at past events. They also propose automatic microphone cut-offs to prevent Trump’s interruptions, aiming for a structured exchange rather than a chaotic verbal clash.
For Trump, debates are an opportunity to highlight Biden’s decline since 2020. Trump’s campaign, led by Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita, echoes Trump’s call for frequent debates, indifferent to who hosts them. They view Biden’s limitations on debate conditions as a tactic to protect the incumbent from his own weaknesses.
The Biden campaign’s conditions and rejection of the debate commission, which it accuses of failing to enforce 2020 debate rules, could spell the end for the commission that has orchestrated debates since the Reagan era.
Trump’s campaign has consistently criticized the commission and called for earlier debates to match early voting periods, agreeing with Biden against the commission’s outdated methods.
With both sides prepared for negotiation, the upcoming presidential debates promise dramatic confrontations pivotal for this election cycle. All eyes will be on the networks willing to host these high-stakes debates.
Liberty requires eternal vigilance. That's why we work hard to deliver news about issues that threaten your liberty.
