The withdrawal of Joe Biden and the selection of Kamala Harris has transformed the presidential election of November. It will now be argued on different issues and on different battlegrounds, not all of former president Donald Trump’s choosing. His planned strategy has been much weakened and try as he might he will have difficulty in fixing Harris with the blame for any of Biden’s sins, real or alleged.
But I expect that Trump must be rated a clear favourite to win the election. He is a far better campaigner; Kamala should have more support, and more funds, than ever she had in a previous campaign, but the hustings are not her strong point, and I doubt that she can be schooled past her imperfections before November.
The present generation of Republicans are far more Trumpist than the old Republican party. The lead players, now including JD Vance, the vice-presidential candidate, are wily, flexible and not in the least able to be contained by facts, thought out policies and debating points. These, if anyone is paying attention, is where a Harris could out-argue a Trump or a Vance. But about half the electorate is paying no attention to facts or nuances and political and economic syllogisms and common sense. They have instead talked themselves into the idea that they have had a gut full and that Trumpism, even Trump ratbaggery, could not be worse. The task for Harris and her colleagues is to kill that mood, and I don’t believe she has the skill or the reflexes to do it. Or the nastiness.
I wish she did, because a victorious Trump is a menace to world peace, to American living standards and to civilised constitutional government. I think Harris could make a better fist of the task than Biden, whose decline was obvious over the past six months. If Harris fails, a bitter Biden will claim he could have won it himself, but the evidence is against him. It is said that the Obamas failed to enthusiastically endorse Harris because they did not believe she could win. But they had no candidate (except, in my opinion Michelle Obama) who could do a better job with the notice they had. [I should add that my record of predicting election results, whether in America or Australia, is far from impressive. But that, if anything, spurs me towards realistic appraisal, rather than hope.]
The Trump crusade has not been gamed to be about reason, palpable hits, or inexorable logic. It is consciously programmed to be about feelings, emotions and moods, grievances and anger that important groups have been missing out. It is to that beat that the target audience is dancing. Those who are straining to hear the words, so that they can parse, fact-check and deconstruct them have not been listening to the same music. Their analyses and their gotchas carry no weight at the campaign rallies. Not even in the congress or the Supreme Court.
That some seem obsessed by unimportant details such as facts is proof of how much they are out of touch and how they do not get it.
John Waterford AM, better known as Jack Waterford, is an Australian journalist and commentator.
Contributions to Pearls and Irritations
Your contribution will fund quality independent comment and analysis in Pearls and Irritations
Contribute
