My bet is he will make some absurd demand or excuse and refuse the debate.

That's what I'm expecting, too.

Can he get out of debates?

Will his ego let him?

On the one hand I'm sure he doesn't want to debate but on the other hand if he doesn't debate he's backing down. From a woman no less. Unless he can figure out some plausible way to spin it so it doesn't look like he's backing down.

Which I can't see but I'm sure he's got people he's promised to pay who will spin something for him.

I think Trump has the advantage in the debates. He's difficult to prepare for since who knows what the hell he's going to say, he's very good at just saying shit that has no connection to reality and getting away with it, and he's good at putting on a show. Debates aren't about issues and policy and the stuff that Clinton is good at, they are about the performance. When people bring up make or break moments in presidential debates, it's never about substance, it's about the best zinger or who was too stiff and that sort of stuff.

they are about the performance.

Yeah, but he's proven in interviews that he gets angry and blustery when he can't answer a question, so all it will take is a little pushback from Clinton -- or even a moderator -- and he's likely to blow his top.

Not all performances -- even bombastic ones -- are good.

Also, Trump as the advantage of not being a woman. There's that double standard that woman have to deal with trying to come across as strong. It sucks, but it's out there. Hillary has to walk a tight rope while Trump can do whatever the fuck he wants.

I think it'll be tough.

Yeah, but he's proven in interviews that he gets angry and blustery when he can't answer a question, so all it will take is a little pushback from Clinton -- or even a moderator -- and he's likely to blow his top.

Yeah, that could happen, but I think Hillary's team can't afford to get cocky. I remember when the common wisdom was that Gore would crush Bush in the debates because, well, you know, but Ann Richards disagreed because Bush came across as very affable and stayed on message.

Hillary survived 9+ hours of interrogation from a far-better prepared opponent than Trump will be, in the Benghazi hearings. She never even lost her temper. I think she'll be fine.

Bush came across as very affable and stayed on message.

Trump has thus far proven he is neither affable or able to stay on message.

Trump has thus far proven he is neither affable or able to stay on message.

He's going to smirk and say something borderline misogynistic, and Hillary is going to smile faintly and throw out a contradictory fact, and Trump will stumble. Break his rhythm, and by the end of the hour he'll be fuming.

Trump has thus far proven he is neither affable or able to stay on message.

Ok, so when I look at Trump's convention bump (and seriously, how do you get a bump for a convention like that), I'm mostly comforted by the thought that Hillary has two aces up her sleeve. (The Republicans have one too, namely their egregious voter suppression efforts.)

First ace is that Hillary has an actual campaign operation. She has a GOTV operation. She has a voter database. Trump has a Twitter account. That disparity counts for something come election day.

The second ace is this right there. Trump can't stay on message. The Democrats' convention deserves a good bump, it was well crafted and on message, and it had some killer speeches. But now we won't be able to disentangle any bump from the hit on Trump for inviting Russia to subvert the election. It's safe to say that won't be the last time he puts his foot in it.

(There's potentially a third ace: Clinton has enthusiastic and credible surrogates who are fully on board with advocating for her, most notably the President. Conversely, my favourite line about the two conventions was "Trump brought Scott Baio to a Meryl Streep fight".)