ChrisWeigant.com

Could Trump Dominate The Debate In An Unexpected Way?

[ Posted Monday, August 21st, 2023 – 15:08 UTC ]

It is already conventional wisdom that Donald Trump is going to try to steal all the thunder from the first Republican presidential debate, by counterprogramming with a Tucker Carlson interview (which will assumably air simultaneously with the debate). But I think there's going to be more to it than that -- in fact, it seems incredibly obvious to me, although so far not many others seem to have picked up on it. I think Donald Trump is going to steal the show in a different and perhaps unexpected way -- by turning himself in to be processed at the Atlanta jail either right before or during the debate.

Trump has until Friday at noon to do so. And the people who run the jail have put out an invitation for everyone to come in any time, 24/7. The jail's always open, to put it another way. So Trump could certainly arrange to show up right during primetime. And, really, why wouldn't he?

The primary debates are exclusive events -- one television network hosts them, and they only play on that network. But Trump turning himself in? That would air on all the other networks, probably cable, streaming, and broadcast combined. It'd be primetime, so perhaps broadcast networks wouldn't break in for coverage, but everyone else definitely would. Think of the ratings! Trump certainly must be....

Even Fox would be hard-pressed as to what to do. Ignore Trump? Run the debate anyway? Cover Trump and run the debate later in the night? Put Trump and the debate on a split screen? They would be stuck in a corner. Which, no doubt, would delight Trump. He's reportedly going to blow off both the first two debates, both of which will air on Fox, because he's not happy with their amount of fawning all over him. He's sitting down with Tucker Carlson because Fox fired him -- making it all another thumb in Rupert Murdoch's eye for Trump.

If Trump timed his arrival right, he could show up right when the debate is scheduled to begin. He'll have to do some sort of "perp walk" into the jail, which will be filmed by a bazillion live cameras. Then he'll get processed, which will likely take at least an hour or so. Then, right when the debate was scheduled to end, Trump could walk out of the jail and hold a little press conference on the sidewalk in front of it. He could rant and rave and maybe he'd even take a few questions. Must-see TV!

Perhaps he'll have Tucker's interview play during the slow parts of his processing. That would fill the airwaves with more Trump, and it would give his followers something to do rather than watch all the other Republican candidates.

However he arranged it all, Trump would absolutely dominate the news cycle. The debates would be an afterthought, at best. All the GOP candidates who are struggling for that "breakout moment" will have to be relegated to the B-reel, which will dull any impact they might have been hoping for.

I really can't see much of a downside to any of this, for Trump. He'd get unearned (free) media right during the debate, he would guarantee that he will be the number one subject on the news, and he will even get a chance to vent his spleen in one of those frantic little speeches to the press. He might even crush Fox in the overall ratings -- which would delight him no end, of course.

Even if none of this was happening -- even if Trump sat quietly at home Wednesday night and told Tucker to air it "some other time" -- Trump is still going to dominate the debate stage. Oh, sure, the Fox moderators will be asking lots of questions about all kinds of issues (some of them completely unrelated to Trump), but they are also going to be forced to ask some very pertinent questions about Trump, as well. Such as:

"Do you believe Joe Biden won the 2020 presidential election?"

"You have said [insert some weaselly phrase they've used] about how the 2020 election was conducted, but in the end do you believe that any of it would have flipped enough states for Trump to have actually won?"

"Do you agree with Trump asking Mike Pence to break his oath to the Constitution and reject votes on January 6th? Would you have told your vice president to do so, if it had been you?"

"Do you think Trump did anything wrong by holding on to all those national security documents?"

"Should the Republican Party support a candidate if he has been convicted of serious felonies? You have signed a pledge which may force you to do so -- what are you going to do if Trump is convicted but wins the nomination anyway?"

"Will you pardon Donald Trump if he's in jail when you take office?"

Maybe not every one of those, but at least some of them pretty much have to get asked, Wednesday night. All of the candidates on that stage are running against Trump. They need to make the case for why they're a better candidate than him, and this is a golden opportunity for the candidates to do so -- if they dare. So the moderators absolutely must ask at least some of these questions to all the candidates in some fashion or another.

And -- even if Trump was sitting at home watching Fox with no Tucker interview playing -- all of that would pretty much guarantee that Trump would be the biggest subject in the debate and that any breakout moments would likely be about Trump.

But the thought that Trump would pass up this golden opportunity to dominate all the other candidates in the media Wednesday night is pretty laughable. He has already indicated he not only wants to be the biggest subject of the night in the debates, he wants to tell his own story outside of the debates as well, as counterprogramming.

The best way to do this would be to use his surrender at the jail to maximum effect. The world's television cameras will all spring to life to capture it all, Trump could milk it all for maximum effect (which he has done to various degrees with his other court appearances), and it would all not only happen in primetime, it would also bury the Fox debate.

What's not to love about all that, for Trump?

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

3 Comments on “Could Trump Dominate The Debate In An Unexpected Way?”

  1. [1] 
    John M from Ct. wrote:

    OK, I know it's your job, so to speak. But I can't express just how boring I found this column: Trump, Trump, Trump, more Trump, did I mention Trump yet? Some other topic perhaps - no, wait! Sorry, I meant more Trumpity Trump Trump ...

    I'm not going to vote for him. I'm not going to consider voting for him. I have no intention of watching the debate; I have no intention of watching him get booked; I have no intention of watching the Carlson thing.

    It's so self-referential to write a column about how Trump can get himself more airtime and media coverage, when the column itself is a prime example of how he dominates the political conversation these days - even on the liberal or progressive end of the spectrum.

    Ignoring him -- putting him on page 10 or at the bottom of the screen scroll -- just seems to be impossible for the media and the commenariat. But why? How hard could it be to NOT cover his every speech, tweet, post, speech, legal filing, or insane rant? Is there a single person in the United States who hasn't already made up their mind about him, and what they think of him, and whether they plan to vote for him? I don't believe there is. So what is all the coverage about, from a political journalism point of view?

    Sorry - again, I know you think this is part of your job description in writing a political column. But I wish he would just go away, courtesy of the national media - who could make it happen anytime they wanted to, or anytime they realized how much of their readership or viewership is sick, sick, sick to death of this guy.

  2. [2] 
    andygaus wrote:

    My understanding is that Trump has already announced his surrender for Thursday and seems to think that his interview with Carlson will be enough to siphon everybody's attention away from the debate.

  3. [3] 
    Mezzomamma wrote:

    Chris, you do a great job. But John M from Ct. has a point: what about focussing more on: Dems doing a good job at national or local level (not just the weekly award), Dems making a good showing on any media, good lines from Dems, good prospects for the future, national, state or local policies that are working.... I'm sure there's lots and I'm sure people could come up with more.

    Not every time and not endless puff pieces, but points that can be put into circulation, especially to counter the R memes regurgitated without thought on so much of the media.

Comments for this article are closed.