Tomorrow's the election, and I think this is my first political comment of 2024.
Back in 2000, I offered my readers 15 servings of well-reasoned political commentary, specifically on the Biden-Trump contest, not to mention more general commentaries on the alarming state of American political stability in the world of 2020.
I formally endorsed Biden on March 4, 2000, an endorsement that rocked the political world.
This year, I have remained oddly silent. "Oddly" even to myself. I guess that when President Biden appeared to be the obvious Democratic nominee, I was so depressed at his chances of defeating any younger Republican that I just kept my mouth shut. When Kamala Harris suddenly, overnight, replaced Biden on the ticket, she seemed like a breath of fresh air. An offering of a new generation, such as when Kennedy succeeded the ever popular and respected, but no longer quite dynamic, Eisenhower.
Kamala seemed so attractive and so vigorous, and Trump seemed so Trumpy, although Trumpiness of a nature ever darker and more violent and coarser and more vulgar than four years earlier, that I kept feeling the choice was obvious -- obvious to me, and that it must be obvious to most voters.
But of course it hasn't been obvious to roughly one half of the voting public. Which has left me gloomy and dispirited and exhausted. And subject to chronic headache. But has not inspired me to debate, because debate would be futile. This isn't an electoral choice between two sets of policies. On a conventional scale, Kamala Harris is a moderate liberal and Trump, judging from his occasional policy remarks, is a moderate conservative. Just another American choice between two candidates that, compared to European politics, appears to be between Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum.
But as a matter of temperament, it's a choice between a typically American middle aged political leader who exemplifies optimism and concern for the nation and its citizens, and a scowling, bitter, overtly authoritarian old man with a poorly repressed hunger for dictatorial power. The choice isn't between two sets of policies, trying to decide which one will work best for the country and for the voter's personal life. It's between those who desire a relatively normal presidential candidate, insofar as anyone aspiring to be president is "normal," ands those who have a psychological need for a stern father, for a father who will make decisions that the nation will then carry out. A person who considers Putin and the leaders of Hungary and Turkey as strong national leaders to be emulated.
At its extreme, perhaps, the Trump voter sees Trump as a desirable "Daddy," as recently became all too obvious from a speech to a partisan audience by rabid Trump supporter and former Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson. Carlson compared Trump, with approval, to a father of teenaged girls, a father who may love his children, but who, when some (Democrats) go astray, delivers deserved discipline. Firm discipline.
“Dad comes home and he’s pissed. Dad is pissed. He’s not vengeful. He loves his children. Disobedient as they may be, he loves them. Because they’re his children. They live in his house. But he’s very disappointed in their behavior. And he’s going to have to let them know.”
How's he going to let them know? Discipline! What kind of discipline?
And when Dad gets home, you know what he says? You’ve been a bad girl. You’ve been a bad little girl and you’re getting a vigorous spanking, right now. And, no, it’s not going to hurt me more than it hurts you. No, it’s not. I’m not going to lie. It’s going to hurt you a lot more than it hurts me. And you earned this. You’re getting a vigorous spanking because you’ve been a bad girl.”
The crowd went wild with approval. News reports observed that when Trump appeared following Mr. Carlson's amazing speech, there were happy cries of "Daddy, Daddy!" from the audience.
Tucker Carlson is an extreme case, but -- in exaggerated form (I hope) -- he has hit upon a characteristic trait of the Trump electorate.
I don't want to call my president "Daddy." Or "Mommy" for that matter. I want a president who sees herself as an employee of the nation, hired to fulfill her constitutional duties for a specific period of time. Who reasons with Congress and with the voters about necessary policies and legislation. Not someone who loves nothing better than to drive an audience crazy with adulation and worship. Who, in fact, appears to have an incredibly excessive psychological need for such love and adulation.
In other words, I want a normal human being for President. And that's why I've already voted for Kamala Harris. And hope you do, too.
