In a shocking turn of events, the upcoming presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump has morphed into a tech-savvy battlefield over microphone control. The two campaigns are locked in a fierce tug-of-war, not over policy points or national issues, but over the fate of their microphones—an emblematic war that echoes an age-old debate: who speaks and who gets silenced? Trump, in his quest for audio dominance, has taken a bold stance: “We should mute the microphones when the other person is speaking,” he declared in a rambling tweet illuminated by the glow of his smartphone. “It’s only fair! Everyone should hear the truth… when I'm talking, of course.” His aides rushed to clarify that this was not a dig at Harris's capacity to speak, but rather a benevolent attempt to preserve “the sanctity of the airwaves.” Meanwhile, Harris’s camp is not backing down. “We need real debates, not a game of ‘who can yell the loudest.’ This isn’t a radio call-in show,” her advisers argued while frantically updating their mic stand playlist on Spotify. “We want an unplugged showdown, raw and unfiltered—a real conversation where we can actually hear each other without Trump's signature ‘turn the volume up and drown out every rational thought’ approach.” The issue at hand stems from a precedent set by Joe Biden in the last election cycle, when the opportunity to speak uninterrupted was so precious that it came with a mute button and an entourage of mic technicians. Biden's camp argued for a muted debate to limit distractions, a tactic that caused Trump to frequently whimsically threaten to break his microphone onstage during the first debate. Backstage at the debate, a giddy Harris beckoned her team, “Let’s give them an option: whoever talks over the other gets to wear a clown wig for the rest of the evening!” Her team cheered, unsure if they were more excited about pressure on Trump or a potential fashion statement for the vice president. To throw a wrench in the works, Trump’s campaign announced an additional “Make Mics Great Again” initiative, proposing that both candidates should tape their mouths shut during the debate unless otherwise prompted. “This is bold, this is innovative,” gushed Trump’s communications director. “No one has ever done it before! We need to break the sound barrier not just as candidates, but as innovators in debate technology!” As the two camps continue their bickering over microphone logistics, audience members are left wondering if the debate will be a clash of ideas or an engineering marvel of who can out-mute the other. For now, it’s clear that the real winners will be the audio-visual technicians, who can look forward to a lucrative evening full of overseen chaos. Stay tuned as the debate approaches, and remember: in this election, every sound counts—unless it comes from the other side.