Biden and Trump say they want to debate, but would they be better off if they didn't?

Mike Bebernes

In each presidential election for the past 50 years, the two leading candidates — with the occasional addition of a third-party challenger — have faced off in person on the debate stage.

This year may be different, though. While both President Biden and Donald Trump say they intend to keep that tradition alive, there’s still plenty of reason to question whether there will be any debates before voters cast their ballots in November.

Biden gave the clearest indication yet of his willingness to debate Trump during an interview with broadcaster Howard Stern on Friday, saying he’s “happy” to do it. That statement marked a shift from his previous position, which was that the likelihood of debates “depends on [Trump’s] behavior.”

Trump has been hectoring Biden for weeks to commit to debates, insisting that he’s eager to do it “ANYWHERE, ANYTIME, ANYPLACE.” He’s also called for as many as seven debates and says he wants them to start much earlier than they typically do, which is usually in the last two months before election day.

But there are still major issues to sort out before debates can happen. Both candidates would have to agree on the rules, format and moderators — which may be a tall task, given how contentious arguments over those things got during the 2020 election.

Biden and Trump took part in only two of the three scheduled debates last time round because Trump, who had COVID at the time, refused to participate remotely in the second debate, forcing it to be canceled. Organizers were compelled to introduce a mute button for the final debate to prevent Trump from interrupting Biden’s answers, which he had done relentlessly in the first debate.

Trump has persistently accused the Commission on Presidential Debates, a nonpartisan group that has planned the events since the 1980s, of being biased against him. Those complaints helped inspire the Republican National Committee to withdraw from the commission two years ago. Trump also declined to participate in any of the debates during this year’s Republican primary.

There’s a lot of disagreement among political experts over how much debates influence the outcomes of presidential elections, but this is the first time in modern history that anyone has had to consider what it would mean if they didn’t happen at all.

Many commentators argue that a lack of debates could be especially risky for the 81-year-old Biden because it could feed the perception that he’s not up to the task of serving another four years. At the same time, though, Trump might miss out on the opportunity to put Biden’s energy level and mental aptitude to the test on a huge national stage.

But others make the case that the pitfalls of debating may be even more perilous for both candidates. They argue that while a solid performance could help ease concerns about Biden’s age, a single ill-timed mental slipup could be devastating for his campaign. Trump — who, at 77, faces his own questions about his age — also faces the danger of coming off as erratic or poorly suited for the presidency if he loses his cool, especially in the likely event that moderators press him on his legal troubles or his lies about the 2020 election.

With several months before the first planned presidential debate, which is scheduled for Sept. 16, it may be some time before it becomes clear if both campaigns will formally agree to debate. Another significant unknown is whether independent candidate and vaccine conspiracist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will be able to satisfy the commission’s qualification rules and earn himself a spot on the stage alongside Biden and Trump.

One big mistake on the debate stage could crater Biden’s chances

“Biden’s handlers are probably worried that he’ll look old and unsteady — or, worse, make some gaffe that reminds everybody of what they don’t like about him.” — Bill Cotterell, Tallahassee Democrat

Trump risks exposing his own shortcomings in an unfriendly debate environment

“When Trump claims that he’s ready to debate Biden, don’t believe him. In attempting to show on a debate stage that Biden allegedly lacks the mental fitness to be president, Trump would inevitably prove just how morally and temperamentally unfit he himself remains for the job.” — Renée Graham, Boston Globe

Refusing to debate would feed into Biden’s biggest political weakness

“Biden won’t take that bait, but if he truly wants to debate, he should formally agree to somewhere, sometime, someplace. Otherwise voters might decide Mr. Trump is right about him.” — Editorial, Wall Street Journal

Swing voters really do need the debates to help inform their decisions

“It’s part of the campaign cadence that people come to expect, so if they were not to happen, there would certainly be a void especially for … people who haven’t made up their mind, those coveted swing voters, they wouldn’t be able to hear from those candidates on a national stage.” — Jordan Fabian, Bloomberg

Neither candidate has much to gain by debating

“The idea of a Biden versus Trump debate seems like a bad idea for all who would be involved. Biden looks and sounds significantly older – and frailer – than he did during the two 2020 presidential debates. The physical contrast won’t help Biden. … It’s hard to see how [Trump’s] participation in a debate would help him appeal to suburbanites and swing voters. Those voters tend to want someone who is measured and thoughtful, two words rarely associated with Trump.” — Stuart Rothenberg, Roll Call

Biden should agree to debate only if real rules are in place to keep Trump in control

“Biden has the leverage here. And he should use it. Let Trump grumble and groan for a while about debates. Keep the focus where it should be for now, on holding him accountable in court. Then, offer to debate only if Trump concedes to a new and improved set of strict and enforceable rules that empowers that mute button if he tries his old tricks. Because he will. He always does.” — Chris Brennan, USA Today

Biden shouldn’t participate in a forum that treats Trump as just any other candidate

“Imagine watching the debate with the sound off—what would you see? Two men, both identified as ‘president,’ standing side by side, receiving equal deference from some of the most famous hosts and anchors on American television. The message: Violence to overthrow an election is not such a big deal. Some Americans disapprove of it; others have different opinions—that’s why we have debates. Coup d’état: tip of the hat? Or wag of the finger?” — David Frum, Atlantic

The debates would inevitably become a mess that makes this election even more depressing

“If televised Biden-Trump debates should happen, voters and the world at large would observe a series of consultant-driven cheap shots, tall tales, angry rhetoric and incoherence. … The chaotic display would simply demoralize an already disgruntled electorate that is starving for sanity in the political process.” — Jeffrey M. McCall, The Hill

Debates won’t really matter, whether they happen or not

“With most voters destined to be locked into Biden or Trump by late summer, how they rise or fall in debates is unlikely to flip decisions about how they are going to vote.” — Stuart N. Brotman, Post and Courier

Both candidates are posturing to avoid looking like they’re ducking the debates

“That would be a catastrophic mistake for whoever proposes it first or whoever walks away from it. There is a general expectation that if you’re running for president, you’re going to debate so that the American public can evaluate candidates side by side or three candidates side by side by side.” — Chris Kofinis, Democratic strategist, to NBC News

Advertisement