Sunday Issues-September 22, 2024
Kamala Harris should win the election by default, but don’t assume that.
Over the weekend, I realized that Donald Trump has a new ally—thought leaders who know who he is but, intentionally or otherwise, are working to return him to the White House. These thought leaders are not just disgruntled Republicans but also liberals and progressives. More than a few of them would tell you they plan to vote for Harris but then proceed to catalog her failings.
One thought leader who seemed to understand how dangerous Trump is wrote a piece for the Wall Street Journal over the weekend that called Trump “Awful” but implied that Harris was unacceptable. Peggy Noonan, a former speechwriter for Ronald Reagan, called Harris an “Artless Dodger.” Harris’s failure is not laying out more details of her agenda.
Noonan’s criticism echoes claims made by Trump that she has no agenda. Noonan also speculates that “artless dodging” is on purpose. She asks:
Why does she dodge away from clarity? Why doesn’t she take opportunities to deepen public understanding of her thinking?
Then Harris speculates that she may not be interested in policy or has decided to “figure it out later.” Another reason offered effectively calls Harris a liar:
Because she doesn’t want you to understand where she stands. Because she’s more progressive than she admits, and there’s no gain in telling you now.
This last claim was too much for me. It could be read as agreeing with Trump that Harris may be Comrade Harris, a communist who is more dangerous to democracy than Trump is. Give me a break.
I know several opinion writers and political junkies who read Noonan regularly and respect her. Do I think Noonan’s attack on Harris will lead to other writers “taking a closer look at Harris?” Yes, I do.
Don’t get me wrong by reading my criticism of Noonan and others scrutinizing Harris as an effort to help Harris. Like Noonan, I don’t find Harris perfect, but the difference between Harris and Trump could not be greater. We generally know what Trump has planned: A war on migrants, another round of culture wars (things like “banning Critical Race Theory and prohibiting transgender men in women’s bathrooms and sports), more tax cuts for the wealthy, and a promise to end the war in Ukraine (even if that means handing Putin victory.) And let’s not forget about Trump’s multiple positions on reproductive rights.
Let’s also take a look at Harris. She is clear on abortion and has laid out a plan to address housing shortages and opportunities. She believes in climate change, supports Ukraine, embraces the Biden effort to achieve a more lasting Middle East peace, and is not a racist. Is that enough for you?
I have read enough of Harris’ policy positions to be comfortable preferring them over the MAGA agenda. I have read enough of Project 2025 to know—and reject—another Trump presidency.
Have I forgotten that Trump has distanced himself from Project 2025, claiming he hasn’t read it? Of course not. I believe Trump is the one in this instance. Given that he also has not read his wife’s new book, Melania, he most likely has not read the 900 pages of Project 2025. But, from his speeches and a look at the people who wrote Project 2025, it is reasonable to consider it the Trump agenda. J.D. Vance wrote the foreword to Project 2025.
America reaches a fork in the road in November. If Trump wins, the progress America has made on addressing climate change, adjusting to the reality of a multi-racial population, and creating opportunity for all will be over.
So, what do I think opinion writers need to do? Continue to urge Harris to elaborate on her plans, but don’t forget to ask Trump to do the same. And take what policy specifics you have from both candidates and comment on those specifics.
One more thing—let’s not forget about character. Last week, I started reading the new book Lucky Loser by Susanne Craig and Russ Buettner, two New York Times reporters. It is a history of the Trump family business. Let me summarize the takeaway: Trump is the artless dodger—lying whenever to get ahead and sometimes for no reason at all, cheating people, and showing a ruthless disregard for the types of people who are the heart of the Trump “base.”
Thank you.
Thanks for reading Sunday Issues this week. I appreciate your support and would welcome comments on how to make Dean’s Issues & Insights better.
© 2024, John Dean, all rights reserved.
I too am frustrated by nationally read pundits who keep asserting that Harris is not offering enough details on her policy plans. Dean points out that she has in fact made her position clear on the issues most important to most voters. By contrast, my local paper here in tiny Easton, MD reprinted an AP story about Trump's speech yesterday in North Carolina focusing on women. Here's what Trump said: "“I will protect women at a level never seen before. They will finally be healthy, hopeful, safe and secure,” Trump said. “Their lives will be happy, beautiful, and their lives will be great again. So women, we love you. We’re going to take care of you.” It goes on to say "The former president said women won’t have to think about abortion because decisions about regulating it are now left to the states." So, Trump asserts that women will be better off if he is elected. How? Why? Via what specific policies? The AP story does point out those problems. So, Peggy Noonan and your fellow pundits, will you write op-eds asking those questions? Any woman who walks away from that speech feeling reassured about a second Trump presidency is incapable of rational thought.