Harris’ flip-flops small potatoes compared to Trump’s tawdry rap sheet

HALIFAX—Thanks to Donald Trump, the U.S. presidential election is turning into comedy in hot pursuit of farce. To some extent, that is to be expected in an age where politics, like journalism, is morphing from information into entertainment. But the recent presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, watched by 67.1 million people, showcased how risible the whole process has become. The debate was hyped like a heavyweight title fight. It had everything but the weigh-in. Weeks of pre-bout coverage, endless speculation about the outcome, and keen anticipation. Finally, it was time for the combatants to climb into the ring. Kamala came out the champ, and Trump the chump. That was not just the decision of most news agencies, including The Washington Post and The New York Times—Trump himself confirmed the result by his own actions. After losing, he headed over to Fox News for a post-debate foot rub, complaining that it had been three against one in front of the cameras. Those “enemies of the people,” the press, had tipped the scales against him again. The false and pathetic whine that ABC hosts David Muir and Linsey Davis were “far-left moderators,” who picked on Trump, was quickly echoed by flunkies at Fox. For the Foxies, picking on someone apparently means fact-checking. Trump toadies, U.S. Senators Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, quickly called the ABC debate a “disgrace” to journalism. Both men know more about Egyptian architecture than they do about journalism. It was yet another re-run of the old Trump movie. When he loses, whether at the polls or in court, Trump and his cronies cry foul, fraud or hoax. Why? As he said last week, referring to himself in the third-person, “Trump is never wrong.” Normally when you win, whether in a boxing match or a debate, it’s a more or less settled moment. On that day, and until the next rumble, you bested your opponent and get to wear the belt. But much of the coverage of Kamala Harris’ win was oddly grudging. Some of it was facetiously conditional. Though most commentators awarded the match to Harris, the judgment came with a caveat; it was not at all certain that her debate performance would affect the election. She still had a long way to go and a lot to prove. As evidence, many of the news agencies conducted post-debate straw polls of voters in swing states. A number of those interviewed complained that they still didn’t know enough about Harris to vote for her. She had yet to show them who she was and what she believed. That reaction seems more than a little disingenuous when you consider that Kamala Harris has been in the public eye for a long time. She has served as a district attorney, attorney general of California, a senator, and, for the last three-and-a-half years, vice-president of the United States. No scandals and just a steady assumption of greater and greater public responsibility. But assuming some voters honestly need to know more about Harris before voting for her, they are ignoring another obvious issue. What do they already know about Donald Trump? They know that he was twice impeached in his one-term presidency. They know that he was the most prolific liar in presidential history. They know that he promised to balance the books, and instead added $US8-trillion to the national debt. They know that while a million Americans were dying during the COVID-19 pandemic, he recommended injecting bleach to counter the virus. They know that the inner circle in his own administration, including his vice-president and defence secretary, can’t today “in conscience” vote for him, and don’t think he’s fit for office. They know that he is a convicted felon, awaiting sentencing on 34 counts of falsifying business records to pay hush money to a porn-star. They know he was found liable for sexual abuse on journalist E. Jean Carroll that one judge called “rape.” They know he boasted about grabbing women by their private parts, and getting away with it because he was famous. They know he has been indicted for unleashing a violent mob on the U.S. Capitol in an attempt to overturn the result of a free and fair election. They know that Special Prosecutor Jack Smith is appealing to the 11th Circuit Court the decision of a Trump-friendly judge in Florida to throw out the classified documents case against the former president. They know he stacked the U.S. Supreme Court with arch-conservatives of dubious integrity. The Trump court struck down Roe v. Wade, ending the constitutional right of women in the U.S. to access an abortion. That same court granted the former president a substantial degree of immunity from prosecution. They know he called Russia’s invasion of Ukraine a “brilliant” move by Russian President Vladimir Putin. They know that he exchanged what he characterized as “love letters” with North Korean tyrant Kim Jong-Un. They know that one of his favourite world leaders is Hungary’s Viktor Orban, the champion of illiberal democracy and authoritarianism. They know that during his presidency, he rolled back more than 125 measures to protect the environment, and that he plans to “drill, baby, drill” if re-elected. They know he has vowed to round up and deport millions of people now living in the United States. They know that he plans to impose a 100 per cent tariff on any country that moves away from using the U.S. dollar as the word’s reserve currency. Investment banks and bond rating agencies like Goldman Sachs and Moody’s say such a policy would trigger massive inflation for U.S. consumers. And, thanks to the recent ABC debate, they now know two more things. He believes that Harris isn’t really Black, and he thinks that immigrants are abducting and eating the pets of the good people of Springfield, Ohio. No, really. It is the right and duty of citizens to learn as much as they can about any candidate who wants to govern their country. It is fair to ask Harris about policy reversals on issues like building the wall on the southern border, and fracking. But for those holding back from supporting Harris because they don’t know what she stands for, here is the question: what more do American voters have to know about the former president before deciding it would be hard to find a worse candidate to run the world’s greatest democracy than Trump? Harris' flip-flops are small potatoes compared to Trump's tawdry rap sheet. Michael Harris is an award-winning author and journalist. The Hill Times

Harris’ flip-flops small potatoes compared to Trump’s tawdry rap sheet

Canada’s aging crisis and a call for reform in eldercare

South Korea to the rescue in Ukraine?

Appeasing Donald Trump with defence dollars

A reluctance for post-pandemic learning

It’s not promises that build the economy—it’s construction

Progress towards partnership: Canada taking strides on African engagement

Meanwhile, on a planet far, far away

U.S. election offers Liberals a glimmer of hope

Trump’s support among young men in Canada is troubling

Trump told 30,573 lies during his four years in office, but it just doesn’t matter in today’s low-road politics

Trump’s political effigy should read ‘Let them eat dog’

News

Get free news updates

Opinion

Submit a guest opinion article

resources

Advertise

subscribe

get help

Get free news updates

Submit a guest opinion article

Harris’ flip-flops small potatoes compared to Trump’s tawdry rap sheet

Get The Foreign Policy Newsletter