The notion of engaging in a debate with former U.S. President Donald Trump has left many pondering its value.

 
The Trump era, marked by its fiery and polarizing discourse, has raised questions about the effectiveness of such debates in today’s political landscape.

Trump, known for his combative rhetoric and penchant for personal attacks, has turned debates into spectacle rather than substance. Many argue that engaging in debates with him only fuels his narrative and distracts from the critical issues at hand.

Critics argue that debating Trump is a futile exercise, as he often employs diversion tactics, deflecting from the actual questions posed to him. Instead of providing substantive answers, he resorts to personal attacks and inflammatory language, further deepening political divides.

This trend has prompted politicians and commentators alike to reconsider the value of debating Trump. Some argue that it’s more productive to focus on policy discussions and engage in civil discourse that promotes unity and problem-solving.

In the era of modern politics, where communication is instantaneous and social media amplifies every word spoken, the question remains: Is debating Trump a productive exercise or a futile endeavour? #featured