Donald Trump's Debate Performance Shows He Has No Business Being President
In any normal
political campaign, Donald Trump's performance in the US presidential
debate would be judged an unmitigated disaster.
In the 56 years of
televised debates in US political history, no candidate for commander-in-chief
has
behaved like the Republican nominee did. Trump did not have a bad night in
the way a sweaty Richard Nixon did in 1960, a muddled Gerald Ford did in 1976,
or an unengaged Barack Obama did in 2012.
Hillary Clinton:
Trump 'trying to hide'
2016 presidential
debate: Clinton versus Trump
Presidential
candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump trade blows in the first of three
presidential debates.
Instead, Trump
demonstrated once and for all that he has no business being a serious contender
for the presidency of the United States.
In the lead up to the
debate, the first of three encounters between Trump and Democratic Party
nominee Hillary Clinton, observers wondered how Trump would craft his approach.
Could he be persuaded
to practice? Would he reassure undecided voters that he could rise above the
fray when the situation demanded? What tactics might he use to throw a seasoned
performer like Clinton off balance?
From his first
rambling answer, however, it became clear Trump had no tactics. His presence on
the stage was as a whirling and mercurial storm of ego and bluster. His answers
often incoherent, he delivered few sustained thoughts on any subject matter and
responded to requests for policy detail from moderator Lester Holt with lists
of problems facing America often unrelated to the question at hand.
Did he have a plan
for jobs? America's factories are moving to Mexico. How can America improve
race relations? Inner cities are dangerous. What to do about the growing threat
of cyber-warfare? Trump's 10-year-old son Barron is a computer whiz.
Yet far more worrying
than Trump's lack of policy detail was his incurious treatment of subjects
about which no leader can afford to be glib.
"I haven't given
lots of thought to NATO," he said when questioned about statements
suggesting he would refuse to honour the 67-year-old military alliance that
plays a key role in US foreign policy.
On the Middle East,
he reiterated his belief that the US should have taken Iraq's oilfields after
invading the country, an act that would constitute a war crime under the Geneva
Conventions.
He talked up a New
York City policy permitting police to randomly search members of the public,
then argued with Holt about whether or not the proposal had already been
declared unconstitutional. Trump was wrong – a judge found New York's
stop-and-frisk tactics to be racially discriminatory and ended them in 2013.
But even if American
voters could tolerate Trump's ignorance and policy vacuity, he demonstrated
better than ever that he is fundamentally incapable of behaving in a manner
befitting the nation's highest office.
From his entry into
the presidential race, Trump has found success by bullying his opponents.
Whether in the primary debates, in interviews with journalists, or on stage at
the Republican National Convention, his strategy has been to exert dominance
over anyone who challenges him, winning by declaring himself the biggest,
toughest guy in the room.
It worked when he had
to stand out amid a gaggle of primary candidates vying for attention or at
his own stage-managed events. But one-on-one against an opponent on equal
footing, his thuggishness was revealed as childish.
When running for the
New York Senate seat in 2000, Hillary Clinton turned the tables on her opponent
Rick Lazio; his attempts to dominate her, including standing over her and
insisting she sign a campaign finance pledge, struck voters as menacing. Lazio
lost the election by 12 points.
Trump should have
been aware of this danger. But from the outset of the debate, he failed to even
be civil to his opponent, addressing her as "Secretary Clinton", then
undercutting the courtesy with a patronising aside: "Is that OK? Good. I
want you to be happy."
It got worse. For
most of the debate, he didn't even address Clinton by name, referring to her
again and again as "she" and interjecting "wrong" over and
over again as she was talking. The website Vox calculated he
interrupted her 51 times over the course of the 90-minute debate.
Trump couldn't be
polite to Holt, either, squabbling with the moderator on the too-rare occasion
he was fact-checked or asked to stay within his speaking time. Controlling
Trump wasn't an easy task for Holt, but he permitted the Republican notably
more leeway than he did Clinton.
Trump's petulance was
compulsive; it seemed as if he was constitutionally incapable of
permitting any attack to go unanswered, to let anyone else have the last word.
Polls over coming
weeks will show whether this extraordinary display has weakened his standing
with the voters, but it should. Donald Trump proved today beyond a doubt that
he is a dangerous, ignorant, and profoundly unpleasant man.
Americans now have
all the evidence they need to declare he should never be president. May they
return him this November to his tacky hotels and reality show melodramas and
put him out of our lives for good.
-Jonathan Bradley
No comments:
Post a Comment