NYT: Trump will skip debate, do interview with Tucker Carlson instead

[wbrocks67]

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/18/us/politics/trump-debate-tucker-carlson.html

[2016]

Trump is a COWARD!

[Kevin Graham]

There's not much reason for him to go to the debate anyway. With his absence everybody would just tear down DeSantis and themselves.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Consider this a modern version of taking the Fifth.

[インターネット掲示板ユーザー Punxsutawney Phil]

The biggest middle finger possible to Fox News...

[Drop Billionaires, Not Bombs]

Ugh. The 2016 debates were the funniest because of him. Sad!

(They cut it out of the clip but I'll never forget Kasich's "Geez oh man!" reaction at the end of the last one)

[I love MAGA, don’t send me to the camps]

I understand Trump’s calculation. He’s already cruising to victory, so why put himself into any situation where there’s even a .05% chance that something or someone catches him off guard?

Even so, he probably would have mopped the floor with this crew…

[Duke 🇺🇸]

No reason for him to debate. He's at almost 60% in the polls.

[MABA 2020]

Not surprising if a little disappointing

[Wrong about 2024 Ghost]

I understand Trump’s calculation. He’s already cruising to victory, so why put himself into any situation where there’s even a .05% chance that something or someone catches him off guard?

Even so, he probably would have mopped the floor with this crew…

LOL. He's hiding out, especially from Christie, because he's a deranged, cowardly POS. No amount of spin will change that.

[emailking]

I'll still watch it and get pizza but this is the only one unless he comes back.

[The Mikado]

Perry Johnson just qualified so they don't need to throw away podium 8.

[Aurelius2]

Strategically I get it. He doesn't need to stoop so low as to debate Perry Johnson. I'm sad though, we'll miss out on some great TV.

[Consuming is good, it's what we're made for]

I honestly think the debate will be even more funny without him. It'll be like how kids talk about their teachers as soon as they leave the room and then they fall deathly silent the moment they walk back in.

[GeneralMacArthur]

It's easy to label him a coward for this, but frankly he has everything to lose and nothing to gain.  Someone should get within 30% of his numbers before he deigns to debate them.

[Drop Billionaires, Not Bombs]

Perry Johnson just qualified so they don't need to throw away podium 8.

Glad he's finally getting the chance to give his two cents.

I'll head out now.

[ProudModerate2]

Seems the article has a pay wall.
Wondering: Will trump have the interview at the exact same time as the debate, so as to take away GOP (Cultists) viewership, and direct it on his interview-time with Tucker?

[Joe Biden 2028]

Viewership of the debate without Trump will be a fifth if he attended lol.

Its going to be much lower than the 2016 or 2020 debates. Of course, less people have cable now.

[Vosem]

I'd be kind of surprised if this doesn't hurt him on the margins, particularly in the early states. Not attending a debate probably cost him Iowa in 2016, and at the primary level 'not attending debates' virtually always comes with a cost, even for pretty overwhelming frontrunners. The first debate is also usually the one that has the highest viewership (or the highest viewership until the field is whittled to, like, 2-3 candidates).

Viewership of the debate without Trump will be a fifth if he attended lol.

Its going to be much lower than the 2016 or 2020 debates. Of course, less people have cable now.

Is primary turnout on track to be as high as 2016/2020? A different way of putting 'relatively few people will be watching' might be 'relatively few people plan on voting'. (OTOH primary turnout was actually quite high in 2022, even relative to 2018, on the GOP side in many states).

[Joe Biden 2028]

I'd be kind of surprised if this doesn't hurt him on the margins, particularly in the early states. Not attending a debate probably cost him Iowa in 2016, and at the primary level 'not attending debates' virtually always comes with a cost, even for pretty overwhelming frontrunners. The first debate is also usually the one that has the highest viewership (or the highest viewership until the field is whittled to, like, 2-3 candidates).

Viewership of the debate without Trump will be a fifth if he attended lol.

Its going to be much lower than the 2016 or 2020 debates. Of course, less people have cable now.

Is primary turnout on track to be as high as 2016/2020? A different way of putting 'relatively few people will be watching' might be 'relatively few people plan on voting'. (OTOH primary turnout was actually quite high in 2022, even relative to 2018, on the GOP side in many states).

It'll be higher than 2012 for Republicans. Probably higher than 2016 democratic primaries.

[Vosem]

Also, for all the hullaballoo a few months ago about how demanding the debate qualification requirements were, and how hard it would be for candidates to get 40,000 unique individual donors, they actually ended up being way too easy. Burgum and Johnson both round down to zero percent support in RCP's national average, but both qualified for this anyway. Neither should have; just copying the Democratic requirements from 2019 (65,000 unique donors) would probably have been better.

(Though I guess I don't think Johnson '24 is really any more ridiculous than Williamson '20. Actually, it's oddly similar in tone to Trump '16, maybe the most similar of any of the campaigns this year...except that the media is not treating him seriously, whereas they instantly treated Trump as the most newsworthy candidate. An interesting juxtaposition.)

[Red Velvet]

I mean, he’s not wrong. Why would someone with over 50% stand on the side with a bunch of people with less than 10%? Makes no sense.

He doesn’t need to with these large differences and anyone thinking a debate would change the drastic % difference is fooling themselves.

[Meatball Slayer]

Trump is a COWARD!

Nope. It’s just good political strategy.

Every other GOP primary contender is an unserious joke. Why should Trump give them any semblance of legitimacy by showing up to what’s essentially a sham on Faux News?

[Mr. Smith]

Not sure what Tucker Carlson's done of late for such a dignified presence.

[Crumpets]

I'm gonna make a somewhat bold prediction and say that this is a bad decision from Trump. Not skipping the debate - that's probably fine. But nobody is gonna tune into yet another Trump-Tucker love fest. I'm gonna guess even an uninspiring debate on Fox will probably out-rate Trump, and that could create an "emperor has no clothes" moment for a guy whose alpha and omega is his tv ratings. Enough to change the election? Probably not. Enough to enrage Trump and get him to dig his various holes with independents even deeper? Possibly.