• SassyRamen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Yeah, they realized too late that mic muting is in his favor when not going against Biden.

    • Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think it is NBD. My theory is they wanted to ensure he accepted mic muting to prevent the BS he did with Hillary. Now he’s locked in to shutting up and sitting in a chair while Harris tears him to pieces.

        • Coelacanth@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          3 months ago

          If - and it’s a huge, astronomic IF - Harris is able to control Trump and shut him down using his own methods, biting back on merit of personal authority when he attempts to interrupt her, then hot mics would benefit her enormously. I don’t think it’s easy to do, as Trump has proven time and again that he can bulldoze people on sheer respectlessness, loudness and tenacity. Given the risk of him running her over being a disaster for her momentum, I think it’s probably safer on balance to have muted mics.

    • rooster_butt@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I don’t think the Harris campaign cared either way. They just pressure the Mic thing move the narrative to the Mic instead of whether the debate was even happening or not. I literally use the same technique on my toddler. Just give him an option about a detail of something I want him to do but don’t give him the option about the act itself.

      • SassyRamen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah, you make a good point. IIRC I had read here on Lemmy somewhere that the Harris compain was wanting to switch back to having mics on.