The agonizing Harris – Trump race has created a dilemma for at least half of our country’s voters, I among them. Millions of us find both candidates unfit for the job. To summarize my own view, I rate these two nominees as the least desirable pair to run for the presidency throughout the 70 years I’ve been a registered voter. Each is scarred with worrisome deficiencies.

But this is politics, after all, so each also has swarms of partisan supporters, along with swarms of detractors, both sides being loud and raucous. And both sides screaming that our democracy will end if their opponent wins.  Could both sides be right? It’s worth noting that polls consistently have revealed that 60 percent of us believe our country is headed in the wrong direction. (Again, I’m in that majority.)

I’ve written about the agonizing Harris-Trump race before, specifically on Scientific American’s endorsement of one of the candidates. (See that post here.)

Here I will focus on only a sliver of the mass of information available, highlighting the markers of each candidates that worry me. If you nod your head vigorously when I focus on one candidate, and shake it angrily when I focus on the other, you may have confirmed your partisanship.

To start with the most obvious, Trump clearly is in love with himself. He is loud, boorish, and given to hyperbole regarding his accomplishments. And how he lies! Below is a quote I found on Wikipedia (See here). It summarizes the general consensus well.

Historian Douglas Brinkley stated that U.S. presidents have occasionally “lied or misled the country,” but none were a “serial liar” like Trump. Donnel Stern, writing in Psychoanalytic Dialogues in 2019, declared: “We expect politicians to stretch the truth. But Trump is a whole different animal,” because Trump “lies as a policy”, and “will say anything” to satisfy his supporters or himself.

So, reflecting on Trump’s personality, how effectively would he deal with Congress during his second term. And equally important, how effectively would he deal with foreign leaders? Would he be forceful and effective? Or might he foster increasing tensions and possibly be a factor in igniting World War III?

ChatGPT Summary:

I asked ChatGPT to summarize Trump’s style. Here’s the result:

Donald Trump’s leadership style was defined by an unorthodox approach that rejected traditional political decorum in favor of a populist, combative tone. While his supporters viewed this as a necessary disruption of the political establishment, critics argue that his divisive rhetoric deepened political and social fractures in the country, undermined democratic norms, and left a legacy of polarization. His focus on energizing his base, often through inflammatory language and a rejection of consensus, fundamentally reshaped the nature of political discourse in America.

Reason enough to worry about a possible second term for Donald Trump? The agonizing Harris-Trump race continues.

Harris presents herself with less flourish than Trump, and thus by most standards is personally less off-putting than her opponent. Nevertheless, she sets off worries for us undecided voters. Here are two that bother me. She frequently strings together combinations of words devoid of meaning, or at best vague, sometimes referred to as “word salad.” Does she do this intentionally to avoid a direct answer? Or is she unable to clearly analyze certain subjects? I don’t know, but her blabbering bothers me. Here’s an example from when she was asked by CBS’s Bill Whitaker why it seemed like Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wasn’t listening to the U.S.  Her answer? Well, Bill, the work that we have done has resulted in a number of movements in that region by Israel that were very much prompted by, or a result of, many things, including our advocacy for what needs to happen in the region.”

You all clear on the above? By the way, Harris’s above answer was broadcast as a teaser on Face the Nation. Later, when Whitaker’s interview with Harris aired on 60-Minutes, another answer of hers was substituted for the one above. CBS, when editing the interview, changed her answer. The last I heard on this matter, which was yesterday, is that CBS refuses to release the full transcript of that interview.

Reason number two. Harris’s flip-flops. During this campaign, she has shifted from far left toward the middle, as did Obama and Biden before her. Here are three examples: In her brief 2020 presidential run, she said, “There’s no question I’m in favor of banning fracking.” In 2019, she was among a number of Democrats who would not “rule out” expanding the Supreme Court; she saw a crisis of confidence in the Court and said that “everything is on the table” to face that challenge. During her brief, last presidential effort she said in Las Vegas, “We have to have a buy-back program (for AR-15s and similar guns) and I support a mandatory buy-back program.”

ChatGPT Summary:

I asked ChatGPT to summarize her changes on the above issues. Here’s the result:

Kamala Harris’s changing positions on fracking, defunding the police, and expanding the Supreme Court reflect the pressures of balancing progressive and moderate factions within the Democratic Party. These shifts have fueled criticisms from both sides of the political spectrum, with opponents accusing her of political opportunism and lack of consistency. While some see her flexibility as pragmatic, others view it as indicative of a deeper issue with political authenticity.

Reason enough to worry about a possible Harris presidency?

What comes next?:

I’ll tackle more issues soon, and force myself to drill down and decide which of the sorry candidates pictured above I will vote against. The agonizing Harris-Trump race continues.  Stay tuned.