Donald Trump will skip the first Republican debate of the 2024 primaries and attempt to upstage his rivals for the party’s nomination by instead sitting down for an interview with Tucker Carlson, according to a report.

In a Truth Social post, the former president gave the excuse that he was far ahead in the polls and that Ronald Reagan hadn’t participated in a debate. Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie called him a “certified loser, verified coward” after news of the decision emerged.

 

On Thursday night, Mr Trump abruptly cancelled his proposed press conference at which he claimed he was going to unveil a report that would “exonerate” him in the criminal case over his attempts to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia brought by Fulton County DA Fani Willis.

He claimed: “My lawyers would prefer putting this, I believe, Irrefutable & Overwhelming evidence of Election Fraud & Irregularities in formal Legal Filings”.

The former president and 18 of his allies were indicted on Monday for running a criminal enterprise to try to thwart the will of the American people and keep Mr Trump in power at all costs. He is also the defendant in three other ongoing criminal proceedings.

 

FULL STORY

 

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

Well yea hes a big man baby and he knows Chris christy will rip him to shreds and humiliate him 

I'm as anti Trump as it gets but I won't criticize him for skipping debates when he is so far ahead. It's a smart political decision.

Should be mandatory to participate

1 minute ago, EVENKEEL said:

Should be mandatory to participate

agree. Nothing like a few hard questions. Who wants to watch 2 gas lighters playing softball?

10 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Should be mandatory to participate

That makes no sense. So if he doesn't participate, then what? He's kept off ballots? 

33 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

That makes no sense. So if he doesn't participate, then what? He's kept off ballots? 

To you makes no sense, to me makes good sense. 

1 minute ago, EVENKEEL said:

To you makes no sense, to me makes good sense. 

It can't be enforced.

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

That makes no sense. So if he doesn't participate, then what? He's kept off ballots? 

In the US presidential debates are not mandatory to party nomination.

Typically, in the US a political party conducts either a presidential preference primary voted by state-recognized registered party members or caucuses that may be closed only to registered party members or open regardless of any party affiliation. From each state then the successful nominee of a party is offered for nomination in typically a national party convention. These party conventions have their own guidelines, rules and provisions to decide the final nomination by convention delegates. 

See https://ballotpedia.org for each state's process.

 

However, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) has regulations that govern how individuals seeking to become national convention delegates.

See https://www.fec.gov

PS: foreign involvement is not (theoretically) allowed.

5 hours ago, Social Media said:

“certified loser, verified coward”

Couldn't agree more!

Apart from Christie if they asked the rest of the Republican nominees " do you agree is Trump a cowardly no good self serving criminal " you would see more squirming than a worm on a hook.

If they can not stand up and say what's needed to be said step aside and let your hero go unchallenged 

6 minutes ago, Dave0206 said:

Apart from Christie if they asked the rest of the Republican nominees " do you agree is Trump a cowardly no good self serving criminal " you would see more squirming than a worm on a hook.

If they can not stand up and say what's needed to be said step aside and let your hero go unchallenged 

The same can be said for you know who.

No one dislikes that <self deleted><self deleted><self deleted><self deleted> more than I do, but I have to admit it is a wise move. There is NO benefit in participating. His intentionally ignorant sheep would follow him through the gates of hell if he told them to. Of course, he'd say, "You go first and I'll be right behind."

 

As well, since he has such mindless spew that flows freely from his gaping maw, he could easily have said something that could be used against him in a court of law.

 

The good news is he doesn't have a chance to win the general election. His gutless retraction of the offer to publicly announce the "evidence" that would have completely exonerated him is like crying "wolf" one too many times (just like the My Pillow guy, remember?). He is losing Independents' support on a daily basis, and gaining no new voters amongst the Republicans. It's a sad testament to how short-sighted the majority of voters are.

4 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

The same can be said for you know who.

Sorry I don't know who at a guess I assume Biden?.

If it is as far as I know no challengers so they are taking that advice 

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

It can't be enforced.

Maybe it should be!

Public opinion might just count if they think he is running scared!

31 minutes ago, Dave0206 said:

Sorry I don't know who at a guess I assume Biden?.

If it is as far as I know no challengers so they are taking that advice 

Far as can see there's 2 others running, Williamson and Kennedy. I know biden won;t debate, no upside.

11 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Far as can see there's 2 others running, Williamson and Kennedy. I know biden won;t debate, no upside.

He would debate if a non loony tunes challenger enters the contest. It would be politically insane to dignity the current troll challengers by standing on a debate stage with them.

 

Also Biden is the incumbent. Trump is the incumbent for the delusional. 

 

20 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Far as can see there's 2 others running, Williamson and Kennedy. I know biden won;t debate, no upside.

The party rules state that candidates must first reach a minimum threshold before they can join the debate, neither of these wingnuts have a chance of ever reaching it, so there will be no (D)ebates.

4 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Should be mandatory to participate

In order to vote you should have watched the debates?

2 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Far as can see there's 2 others running, Williamson and Kennedy. I know biden won;t debate, no upside.

You are quite right I did not know he had anyone in opposition. 

Nevertheless all the Republican challengers will not openly criticise trump on virtually anything ???? so if they think he did a perfect job how can they do it better it's time they grew a pair of using your words you know what 

He should have said his bone spurs were playing up.

29 minutes ago, BusyB said:

He should have said his bone spurs were playing up.

 But he never had any "Bone Spurs" to play up!

If he said that now he might be accused of lying!! ????

9 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Should be mandatory to participate

Yes so true....but this party will not mandate that as only a party with a spine would require such thing!

Using the excuse of no need to debate because he is so far ahead is nothing but a thinly veiled excuse. He would get ripped to shreds on a debate stage with Mr. Christie. Even by not attending, he will get ripped to shreds. There's lots to rip!

10 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Also Biden is the incumbent. Trump is the incumbent for the delusional. 

Here's one even more extreme: Kari Lake said she is not going to run for The Senate because she is governor of AZ and will not relinquish her position.  And here I thought she was the official plumber at Mar-A-Lago.

When it comes to running for public office, heed the great words of Chico Marx "there is no sanity clause."

 

Awww don’t worry about Donnie he’s going to bunker down with the man nanny tucker Carlson were he can safely throw tantrums cry lie and blubber like the toddler man he is then his pal tuckie can sooth his hurt feelings and tuck him in for a nappy 

13 hours ago, HappyExpat57 said:

No one dislikes that <self deleted><self deleted><self deleted><self deleted> more than I do, but I have to admit it is a wise move. There is NO benefit in participating. His intentionally ignorant sheep would follow him through the gates of hell if he told them to. Of course, he'd say, "You go first and I'll be right behind."

 

As well, since he has such mindless spew that flows freely from his gaping maw, he could easily have said something that could be used against him in a court of law.

 

The good news is he doesn't have a chance to win the general election. His gutless retraction of the offer to publicly announce the "evidence" that would have completely exonerated him is like crying "wolf" one too many times (just like the My Pillow guy, remember?). He is losing Independents' support on a daily basis, and gaining no new voters amongst the Republicans. It's a sad testament to how short-sighted the majority of voters are.

And a shock to see how many have no hesitation to vote for a proven continuous long-term liar. All the time scamming the poor of the US.

He's always whinging and playing the victim.  Am I suppose to believe the rural folk are ok with this?   He's coming off like a wimp.  This ain't gonna play well in the places that refuse to sell Bud Light.

 

16 hours ago, Dave0206 said:

You are quite right I did not know he had anyone in opposition. 

Nevertheless all the Republican challengers will not openly criticise trump on virtually anything ???? so if they think he did a perfect job how can they do it better it's time they grew a pair of using your words you know what 

https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/asa-hutchinson-i-will-prosecute-trump-at-the-debate-whether-he-s-there-or-not-191148613887