I think that's really the thing right there. Many evangelicals are one issue voters, and that's the issue. Which is kind of weird because I don't think their stance on abortion is particularly well supported in the bible. It's not talked about directly at all, and there's differing evidence as to how a fetus is viewed.

In comparison, Jesus is exceptionally clear about his very pro welfare stance and is very clearly against the vast accumulation of physical wealth. These preachers that live opulent lifestyles and decry abortion are on very shaky biblical grounds.

There's also the fact that a lot of them are biblical realists. They believe in an actual literal apocalypse, and signs that that will happen are viewed positively. So, things like the coronavirus can be interpreted as good signs.

There's also a strong support of Israel, which to my knowledge, Jewish control of Jerusalem is a prerequisite for the rapture. So, Trump's overly simplistic (to be charitable) view of Israel good Arabs bad is another reason for support.

And frankly, a lot of these communities are indoctrinated to support charismatic leaders, and to shut out fact and logic based challenges. Trump is in many ways like many of the prominent evangelical preachers that are successful. They are in a sense trained to buy into this.

And, they also frequently view themselves as persecuted. They are galvanized by claims that there is a vast conspiracy against them. The idea that elite liberals are working in the shadows against them or that the deep state is out to get Trump is right up their alley.

So, there are many reasons that evangelicals are primed to support figures like Trump.

Roe v. Wade made laws against abortion unconstitutional, to oversimplify.

Catholics tend to be in many ways more moderate. The Catholic Church generally does not subscribe to a literal view of the bible. The current pope is at least somewhat supportive of homosexuals, although I don't know the official stance on marriage. The Church accepts much of the findings of science such as Big Bang Cosmology and genetics, and in fact clergy members contributed a lot to those theories.

Catholicism has also been promoted by the government, not so much in the US (where it was actually opposed fiercely) but in many countries. So the Catholic church as a whole isn't into promoting the same kind of anti-government rhetoric that Trump relies on.

There's also the fact that Catholics were kind of a demonized minority for much of US History. The US schooling system was, in very large part, designed specifically to promote the Bible, and specifically a protestant version. That's why Catholic schools are such a thing in America. 

There was initially fierce division among protestants and catholics. "Christian" was really not a thing for much of American history, because they did not want to share the same label and group identity. They only really started unifying under the Christian banner when minorities began gaining more political power, and immigration from countries like Italy brought in an influx of Catholics. They needed to unify or they'd be outnumbered. Particularly when abortion became a hot button issue, they rallied around it.

Catholics may be stricter than protestants as a whole (I really don't know) but evangelicals are a different matter. They tend to be more extreme, and definitely more literal. 

Well, by the sound of it, Trump's not interested in remote debates and Biden's not interested in rescheduling. I wonder if we'll even get another debate before the election at this point. Can't say I'd object.

How come Trump ain't plastered with flies... unless the spay-on tan is actually insect-repellant...

Currently, there's a town hall debate scheduled for the 22nd. That's the second that was rescheduled. Trump also wanted to reschedule the third for the 29th which is where Biden refused.

Honestly if I was Biden I would refuse any. The Town Hall may be a bit different because the format may make it harder for him to use the same tactics ("Excuse me Mr. Trump, I'm responding to this citizen's question"), but even so I see little to be gained. 

There were rules to the debate that Trump flagrantly and repeatedly violated. If he does not agree to measures to prevent that, I don't see a need to engage at all, covid or no covid. He'll spin it as Biden being afraid, but anyone who would buy that spin is already in his camp.

"I'm not going to waste my time on a virtual debate -- that's not what debating is all about"

I think that illustrates perfectly what his priorities are.

Yeah. His complaint is that they can cut him off at anytime so he can only speak during his agreed upon time allotment. There's no reason to not agree to something that will prevent you from interrupting unless that's what you plan on doing.

Some have reported that Trump's strategy was to constantly interrupt and get Biden to stutter to play up their dementia angle. Based on anonymous sources so grain of salt. 

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chris-christie-biden-stutter/

Whether or not that is particularly true his behavior was a clear attempt to bully and intimidate.

Pence has taken his own cues in the debate from his boss.

Deadline is a site that mostly focuses on film and TV and such but occasionally posts general news stories. As far as I can tell they're generally respected enough at least as far as reporting entertainment news. They're not a site that would just pull something like that out of their ass.

Waiting for more confirmation like

He did cancel his trip back home to Indiana to vote some 3 hours ago without explanation so far, and a positive test sounds like the only plausible reason so far for this abrupt cancellation.