The Dem Panic About Debates: Tom Friedman Edition

Dems are getting more and more panicked about debates between Biden and Trump. They pretend--and probably have even convinced themselves--that it's because Trump is just a master debater. Or, rather: such a master bullshitter. And there's a fragment of truth in that.

But here's a better explanation: progressives never have to compete on a level intellectual playing-field. They've taken over every institution we have, and every argument is slanted in their favor. They basically get home-court advantage, their fans are loudest, they pick the refs... The media gets to filter every event and spin it leftward. The idea of having a progressive and a non-progressive simply arguing in public for everyone to see...terrifies them. Their best strategies are:

(1) Shut down debates

(2) Control the "narrative" about any unauthorized debate that evades their first line of defense.

Also, of course: Biden seems so intellectually compromised that even Trump may be able to best him.

So they're in panic mode, and frantically throwing out ad hoc demands in an attempt to find some pretext for ducking debates.

One they're trying out: no debates until Trump releases his tax returns! Which makes not sense whatsoever. Why not Biden is under no obligation to leave his basement unless Trump releases the returns! Go ahead and make up such stories if you want. Maybe the public will buy it. Maybe they won't. 

I've always thought Trump should release his returns...though now, actually, I think he shouldn't. The IRS has already gone over them with a fine-tooth comb for years. And it is an absolute lead-pipe cinch that the progressive media will lie about what's in there if he does release them. There is simply no doubt about that. If I were him, I wouldn't release them, no matter how clean they were. There will be no honest public evaluation of them; they'll just constitute another opportunity to lie to / baffle the public.

As for "real-time fact-checking"...again: exactly the sort of thing you'd want if you control the "fact-"checkers... Anyone who thinks that a good idea hasn't been honestly evaluating their output.

Anyway: again: progressives/Dems aren't used to having to compete on a level playing field, without the refs in their pocket. This "real-time fact-checking" idea is a way to get around that: ok, sure, our guy will debate...so long as you let us tell people who's winning at every point...

Honestly, I don't understand how people are still falling for this stuff.