Connect with us

Politics

Column: The Biden-Trump debate will be a demolition derby. But will it change the race?

Published

on

Column: The Biden-Trump debate will be a demolition derby. But will it change the race?

This week’s debate between President Biden and Donald Trump won’t produce much in the way of civil dialogue over the nation’s future. It’s more likely to resemble a demolition derby, with each contestant trying to knock the other off course.

And, let’s face it, many viewers will tune in mainly for the crashes.

The question isn’t who will win that series of collisions — it’s who will lose.

Presidential debates rarely transform an election. But Thursday’s showdown could change the momentum in this year’s contest — mostly because the stakes for Biden are so high.

Advertisement

The president is running about even with Trump in national polls, but he’s behind in the battleground states that will determine the outcome. He’s also battling the view among many voters in both parties that he’s too old to serve effectively for another four years.

Republicans have waged a relentless campaign to stoke those doubts. Biden “can’t put two sentences together,” the former president told supporters last month. “He can’t find the stairs off the stage.”

That’s a pretty low bar for Biden to clear. Last week, Trump belatedly realized his mistake and tried to reverse course, calling the president “a worthy debater.”

“I don’t want to underestimate him,” he explained.

Either way, the 90-minute debate will give the 81-year-old president an opportunity to show that he can not only find the stairs but think on his feet as well. If Biden doesn’t visibly pass that test, his campaign will have a hard time recovering.

Advertisement

Trump, who is 78, faces challenges too.

In his first debate against Biden in 2020, the then-president behaved like a disruptive bully and promptly dropped four points in the polls.

A similarly chaotic performance this week in Atlanta would help revive the anti-Trump coalition of voters that fired him last time.

If Trump blunders badly — he has been known to lapse into incoherence and confuse Biden with former President Obama — he too would face renewed questions about his mental fitness.

Again, the question isn’t so much who will win but who will lose. Candidates fail in debates by stumbling more often than they triumph through brilliant wordplay.

Advertisement

So the stakes are high for both candidates. The incentive will be to go on the attack, to try to push the other guy toward disaster.

The debate, hosted by CNN with correspondents Jake Tapper and Dana Bash as moderators, will spare viewers the tedium of opening statements. There will be no live audience, a demand Biden’s side made after witnessing the noisy enthusiasm of Trump supporters at earlier events. Each candidate’s microphone will be silenced while the other is speaking, in an attempt to avoid a repeat of the 2020 debate, when Trump constantly interrupted Biden and the moderators.

I asked strategists from both parties what advice they would give each candidate.

Biden’s first task is to “demonstrate that he’s not too old to serve another term,” said Doug Sosnik, who advised President Clinton during his 1996 reelection campaign.

After that, Sosnik said, Biden “needs to have a clear narrative about his presidency, what his goals would be for a second term. And then he can go after Trump.”

Advertisement

Republican strategist Alex Conant agreed that Biden should try to steer the debate toward the future and away from a referendum on his stewardship of the economy, which has left most voters dissatisfied.

“He needs to make the debate about abortion and everything else Trump doesn’t want to talk about,” Conant said. “He should try to provoke Trump into overreacting … then get out of the way and let Trump destroy himself.”

One pitfall Biden needs to avoid: boasting about legislation he has passed or trying to convince voters that the economy is better than they think.

“He has to prosecute his political case against Donald Trump and not get bogged down, as incumbents often do … in defending his record,” said David Axelrod, who advised Obama during his 2012 reelection campaign.

Trump’s goals, no surprise, are pretty much the reverse of Biden’s. He wants to make the election a referendum on Biden’s first three years.

Advertisement

“My advice to Trump would be: ‘You are going to win this race on two issues: inflation and immigration. Those are the only two things you should be talking about,’” Conant said.

If the moderators or Biden ask Trump about his conviction on 34 felony charges in New York state, “he doesn’t need to engage in it,” Conant said.

Sosnik agreed. “Stick to a referendum,” he said. “Were you better off during [Trump’s] presidency or Biden’s?”

The hazard Trump needs to avoid: lapsing into complaints about the 2020 election, his conviction or his three pending criminal cases. That would reinforce the appearance “that he is only out for himself and settling old personal scores … [and] reminding people how chaotic and exhausting his presidency was,” Sosnik said.

So will Thursday’s debate change the direction of the race? Conant, the Republican, thinks it could.

Advertisement

“This is the most consequential debate we’ve had in recent memory,” he said. “Voters have major questions about each candidate. There’s an unusual number of undecided or third-party voters who might still be movable. If one of the candidates has a really bad night, that could be decisive.”

But Sosnik is skeptical that many undecided voters will bother watching “a debate between two candidates they dislike.”

“It will take a big moment where one of the candidates falls on his face to make it a game changer,” he said.

With four months remaining before election day, one evening in June won’t determine the winner. But Thursday could provide a pivotal moment — depending not on which candidate performs better but which performs worse.

Read more from columnist Doyle McManus on Trump and California:

Advertisement

Politics

Playing catchup to Republicans, Democrats launch ‘largest-ever’ partisan national voter registration campaign

Published

on

Playing catchup to Republicans, Democrats launch ‘largest-ever’ partisan national voter registration campaign

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Acknowledging that “we’ve been getting our butts kicked for years now by the Republicans on voter registration,” Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chair Ken Martin on Tuesday announced the DNC will spend millions of dollars to get “back in the game.”

Martin said that the newly created “When We Count” initiative, which he described as the party’s “largest ever voter registration effort … will train hundreds of fellows throughout the country to register tens of thousands of new voters in communities across the country.”

The announcement by the DNC, in what Martin called an “all hands on deck moment,” comes in the wake of massive voter registration gains by Republicans in recent years and ahead of November’s midterms, when Democrats aim to win back majorities in the House and Senate and a whopping 36 states hold elections for governor.

“For too long, Democrats have ceded ground to Republicans on registering voters,” Martin pointed out. “Between 2020 and ’24 alone, our party lost a combined 2.1 million registered voters. Meanwhile, Republicans gained 2.4 million voters.”

Advertisement

GOP OVERTAKES DEMOCRATS ON VOTER ROLLS IN KEY SWING STATE AFTER YEARS OF DEM DOMINANCE

Democratic National Committee chair Ken Martin addresses party members at the DNC’s summer meeting, on Aug. 25, 2025, in Minneapolis, Minnesota. (Paul Steinhauser/Fox News)

The latest example is North Carolina, where new State Board of Elections data indicated that Republicans officially surpassed Democrats in voter registration for the first time in the crucial southeastern battleground state’s history.

Martin said a key reason for the Democrats’ deficit is that “Republicans have invested heavily in targeted partisan registration” to mobilize and grow their base of voters.

TRUMP TOUTS NEW INFLATION NUMBERS AS AFFORDABILITY ISSUE FRONT AND CENTER AHEAD OF MIDTERMS

Advertisement

But he lamented that “on the left” voter registration for decades has largely been led by nonpartisan advocacy organizations and civic “which limits their ability to engage in partisan conversations about registering as a Democrat.”

Martin said the new effort “is going to require everyone,” including the national, state and local parties, as well as outside groups and political campaigns, “participating in this critical work.”

Pointing to the sweeping ballot box successes by President Donald Trump and the GOP in the 2024 elections, when Republicans won back the White House and Senate and held onto their House majority, Martin said “we can’t just assume that certain demographics, whether they be young voters, voters of color or otherwise, will automatically support the Democratic Party. We have to earn every registration so that we can earn every vote.”

The DNC’s seven-figure initiative, which Martin said would kick off in the western battleground states of Arizona and Nevada, “puts our national party and local parties back in the game. When we count, we’ll begin to chip away at the Republican advantage as we prepare to organize everywhere and win everywhere in 2026.”

The Democratic National Committee announced on Tuesday it will spend millions to shift its voter registration strategy ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. (Melissa Sue Gerrits/Getty Images)

Advertisement

The DNC, as it ramps up to this year’s midterm elections, also faces a formidable fundraising deficit compared to the rival Republican National Committee (RNC).

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

RNC Communications Director Zach Parkinson, pointing to the DNC’s campaign cash problems, charged in a statement to Fox News Digital that “Ken Martin has driven the DNC into debt, overseen anemic fundraising.”

“We at the RNC think he’s the perfect person to oversee Democrats voter registration efforts,” Parkinson added, in a shot at the DNC chair.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

House Democrats challenge new Homeland Security order limiting lawmaker visits to immigration facilities

Published

on

House Democrats challenge new Homeland Security order limiting lawmaker visits to immigration facilities

Twelve House Democrats who last year sued the Trump administration over a policy limiting congressional oversight of immigrant detention facilities returned to federal court Monday to challenge a second, new policy imposing further limits on such unannounced visits.

In December, those members of Congress won their lawsuit challenging a Department of Homeland Security policy from June that required a week’s notice from lawmakers before an oversight visit. Now they’re accusing Homeland Security of having “secretly reimposed” the requirement last week.

In a Jan. 8 memorandum, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem wrote that “Facility visit requests must be made a minimum of seven (7) calendar days in advance. Any requests to shorten that time must be approved by me.”

The lawmakers who challenged the policies are led by Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) and include five members from California: Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach), Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana), Jimmy Gomez (D-Los Angeles), Raul Ruiz (D-Indio) and Norma Torres (D-Pomona).

Advertisement

Last summer, as immigration raids spread through Los Angeles and other parts of Southern California, many Democrats including those named in the lawsuit were denied entry to local detention facilities. Before then, unannounced inspections had been a common, long-standing practice under congressional oversight powers.

“The duplicate notice policy is a transparent attempt by DHS to again subvert Congress’s will…and this Court’s stay of DHS’s oversight visit policy,” the plaintiffs wrote in a federal court motion Monday requesting an emergency hearing.

On Saturday, three days after Renee Nicole Good was shot and killed by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent, three members of Congress from Minnesota attempted to conduct an oversight visit of an ICE facility near Minneapolis. They were denied access.

Afterward, lawyers for Homeland Security notified the lawmakers and the court of the new policy, according to the court filing.

In a joint statement, the plaintiffs wrote that “rather than complying with the law, the Department of Homeland Security is attempting to get around this order by re-imposing the same unlawful policy.”

Advertisement

“This is unacceptable,” they said. “Oversight is a core responsibility of Members of Congress, and a constitutional duty we do not take lightly. It is not something the executive branch can turn on or off at will.”

Congress has stipulated in yearly appropriations packages since 2020 that funds may not be used to prevent a member of Congress “from entering, for the purpose of conducting oversight, any facility operated by or for the Department of Homeland Security used to detain or otherwise house aliens.”

That language formed the basis of the decision last month by U.S. District Court Judge Jia Cobb in Washington, who found that lawmakers cannot be denied entry for visits “unless and until” the government could show that no appropriations money was being used to operate detention facilities.

In her policy memorandum, Noem wrote that funds from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which supplied roughly $170 billion toward immigration and border enforcement, are not subject to the limitations of the yearly appropriations law.

“ICE must ensure that this policy is implemented and enforced exclusively with money appropriated by OBBBA,” Noem said.

Advertisement

Noem said the new policy is justified because unannounced visits pull ICE officers away from their normal duties. “Moreover, there is an increasing trend of replacing legitimate oversight activities with circus-like publicity stunts, all of which creates a chaotic environment with heightened emotions,” she wrote.

The lawmakers, in the court filing, argued it’s clear that the new policy violates the law.

“It is practically impossible that the development, promulgation, communication, and implementation of this policy has been, and will be, accomplished — as required — without using a single dollar of annually appropriated funds,” they wrote.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Minnesota and Illinois Sue Trump Administration Over ICE Deployments

Published

on

Video: Minnesota and Illinois Sue Trump Administration Over ICE Deployments

new video loaded: Minnesota and Illinois Sue Trump Administration Over ICE Deployments

transcript

transcript

Minnesota and Illinois Sue Trump Administration Over ICE Deployments

Minnesota and Illinois filed federal lawsuits against the Trump administration, claiming that the deployment of immigration agents to the Minneapolis and Chicago areas violated states’ rights.

This is, in essence, a federal invasion of the Twin Cities and Minnesota, and it must stop. We ask the courts to end the D.H.S. unlawful behavior in our state. The intimidation, the threats, the violence. We ask the courts to end the tactics on our places of worship, our schools, our courts, our marketplaces, our hospitals and even funeral homes.

Advertisement
Minnesota and Illinois filed federal lawsuits against the Trump administration, claiming that the deployment of immigration agents to the Minneapolis and Chicago areas violated states’ rights.

By Jackeline Luna

January 12, 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending