Debate schedule does not take into account early voting

 Federalist Wire:

...

Trump’s campaign has demanded that the debates this year take place earlier in the election cycle and that they happen more frequently.

They said that because more voters are voting earlier in elections over the past several years, that it’s key to hold the debates at an earlier date.

“Voting is beginning earlier and earlier, and as we saw in 2020, tens of millions of Americans had already voted by the time of the first debate,” Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita, Donald Trump’s co-campaign managers announced in a letter which was written to the Commission on Presidential Debates.

They then said that the commission’s proposed dates for the debates are too late in the election cycle and by then too many people would have made their decision for president through early voting.

“Specific to the Commission’s proposed 2024 calendar, it simply comes too late. By the date of the first proposed debate, September 16, 2024, over 1 million Americans will have likely voted. By the date of the second proposed debate, October 1, 2024, the number of Americans who will have likely cast a ballot will be over 3 million, an increase of 225%,” Wiles and LaCivita’s letter continued.

They also assumed that by the time the third debate takes place this year on October 9, 8.7 million people would have already cast their votes.

Wiles and LaCivita then said that it would be useful to have more debates scheduled as well.
...

Biden has shown that he is not capable of making speeches because of his cognitive decline.  It looks like the debate schedule is an attempt to hide that decline from early voters.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t...
Read more

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more