 |
| Donald Trump and Kamala Harris shake hands at last night's debate (Le Monde) |
Even though she was short on details (as was Trump) her stated positions on the issues are not that far off from the political center where I reside. Trump’s attempts to paint her as a Marxist only made him seem desperate. It didn’t work.
Harris on the other hand skillfully baited Trump into doing what he usually does. Like making ridiculous, nonsensical statements about migrants eating dogs, and taking about crowd size at his rallies instead of the issues he ought to have in his pocket. While he did refer to those issues several times, he kept swerving back to the immigration issue every time he was challenged with a question he didn’t like and didn’t want to answer. Like when he was asked if felt any responsibility for the capital riots on January 6th. He immediately changed the subject to the migrant crisis. And when asked he still insisted he won the last election.
There is so much more say about Trump’s dismal performance last night. But I think this pretty much touches upon the flavor of the debate. He was as nasty as just about everyone on both sides of the political aisle thought he would be. Inflation at the grocery store, the economy, the border crisis, energy independence, Iran’s resurrection and spread of terror, the US withdrawal from Afghanistan... are all winning issues for him. But instead he concentrated on smearing his his opponent with lies, exaggerations, name calling, and insults.
Harris on the other hand looked like she knew what she was talking about and came off much better – , more presidential, and, I dare say even more patriotic than Trump. He couldn’t even bring himself to deny the accusation that he would discard the constitution if he thought it would help his cause. When asked about the insurrection he immediately swerved into the migrant crisis. Blaming it all on the Biden Harris policies of the last 3 and a half years. Which may be true but was obviously a dodge of the question asked of him by the moderators.
Accusations that Harris flip-flopped from her progressive past positions to gain wider support may or may not be true. But it is just as possible to say that she legitimately changed her mind based on additional information and then thinking about them some more . Accusations by Trump that she is lying and will revert to her past progressive views once elected have no basis in reality. People can and often do change their minds.
So who won the debate? Depends who you ask. Most Republicans think Trump won. Most Democrats think Harris won. Undecideds are probably still undecided.
Honestly, if I were to judge the two candidates strictly on their performances last night, it would be a no brainer for me. Harris would win, hands down. No contest. She came off as the far superior candidate. And even though I don’t agree with all of her policy positions, many of them are not that different from Trump’s. (He kind of acknowledged that at one point and offered to send her a MAGA cap!)
There is one issue however that is a deal breaker for me. Which she well articulated last night. I have no reason to doubt her sincerity. On the contrary, there are already indications that she will follow up her words from last night with action.
After asserting her firm, life long support for Israel and her people... and promising to always provide Israel whatever it needed for its security and self defense against the hostile forces that surround her, she added with absolute certainty the need for a 2 state solution. Which I assume would follow the traditional assumptions of what the borders would look like.
Israel would – with some minor border adjustments retreat from West Bank (Judea and Smaraia) to its pre 67 borders. And the Palestinians would then create their own state, called Palestine on the West Bank. She added that it would include guarantees of security for both peoples. In theory I would agree with a solution like that and have said so many times.
Why is this a deal breaker? Because there’s theory and there’s reality. Who in their right mind would think this is a good idea after October 7th of last year. When Israel turned over Gaza to the Palestinian Authority in 2005, it didn’t take long for Hamas to take over – with the full support of Palestinians living in Gaza. Support Hamas still enjoys even after over 40,000 Palestinians (according to Hamas) have been killed as a direct consequence of their massacre of 1200 Jews.
It isn’t only Palestinians in Gaza that support Hamas – or any other terrorist organization. Palestinians on the West Bank support them too. There are very few if any Palestinians that think the Jews have a right to any part of their land.
If under pressure from a Harris presidency a Palestinian state were to be set up on the West Bank we are looking at Gaza 2.0 on steroids. Only with a much broader border in a much larger area. There is no way any political leader in Israel on the right or the left would agree to setting up Gaza 2.0 on the West Bank. It would be suicidal.
What about Harris’s insistence that it would be done with guarantees for security for both peoples.
Really? How’s she going to do that? Will she rely on ‘friendly’ Arab nations to patrol the borders? Are they going to monitor whether a tunnel complex like the one in Gaza will be built? Is she going to rely on electronic surveillance the way Israel did on October 7th? Is she going to deploy American troops to do any of that?
My guess is that she will engage the UN to set up some sort of multinational peace keeping force agreeable to both sides to patrol the border and monitor things like tunnel construction and the smuggling of arms and ammunition.
Guess what? I trust the UN to protect Israel from future West Bank terrorism about as much as I trust Yahya Sinwar to do that.
Which brings me back to square one. I would much sooner see a Harris presidency than another Trump presidency. But based on her 2 state solution comments last night and other indications of those intentions, I’m not comfortable voting for someone that I fear will harm Israel’s security if not its very existence. Even if she does so with the best of intentions.
Some might say that I am a one issue voter. I completely reject that accusation. What I am is worried about the future of the more than 6 million Jewish people in the Jewish state. That is an issue that overrides all others for me.