I haven’t written much about politics lately. I guess my writing urges have been worn down by too much political use. But I need to speak–briefly, anyway–about what is going on now. It appears that Trump has slightly closed the gap between himself and Harris and it now appears, at least for the moment, one of the closest Presidential elections in history, at least looking at the potential popular vote.

It also appears to be getting stranger and weirder as the days roll along, mostly due to increasingly odd statements and even behavior from Trump and Vance, but also, to some extent, from media coverage and maybe some lackings in the Harris campaign.

I guess I want to boil this down to three main points–

1) Trump’s statements, often strange in the past, have gotten more so. It is difficult to tell(for me, anyway)if this is the result of careful calculation of what he thinks works with his base and/or potential supporters, of if he really believes all of it. As I believe I have suggested before it’s sort of hard to tell which would be worse. I’m inclined to go with the latter as worse. The former would merely mean Trump fell into the category of dishonest politicians, a category we’ve been familiar with for too long. He would be one of the leaders, of course, but still it’s a recognizable type(and understandable if you take a sort of super-cynical view of human nature and particularly of the US)

The latter choice, that he really believes all or at least some of this stuff is, I think worse. His thing about “The Enemy Within” gets to me(I wonder if he knows RFK, Sr once wrote a book with that as its title?). He seems to mean domestic traitors, particularly ones that mess with elections(anybody want to say “projection?”) and maybe some others. It’s sometimes hard to tell exactly who he means, because he is, possibly on purpose, not always too specific). He also is way over the top with many of his charges.

We all know the border is a mess and as a matter fact has been for decades. But what is this about how Harris has organized people from all over the world to come from prisons, mental institutions, etc and screw up the US as badly as possible? Unless he really is nuts, i.e. psychotic(which I doubt), he knows this is a lie. I have never heard or seen one piece of evidence which would prove this ridiculous charge or even suggest there might be some truth to it. Of course, as with so many other, uh, untruths, he seems, so far, to be getting away with it.

Then there’s his musical interlude Monday night at a rally. I guess we could just be glad he was listening to music instead of stating his usual stuff, but what kind of a candidate behaves this way? Again, is it a calculation or does he really think it appropriate?(The music wasn’t half-bad but I’ll bet it wasn’t his choice)

2) Somewhat pursuant to the above, I don’t think the Harris campaign or the media are handling Trump’s bizarness and lack of truth very well. One thing that has gotten under my skin lately is this–J D Vance and Trump and a lot of their supporters like to act as if Kamala Harris is responsible for everything that’s happened since Trump left office. Up until Joe Biden dropped out they were trashing the Biden Administration and usually using that name. After Biden pulled out of the race and Kamala rose to the top it suddenly became “the Biden–Harris Administration” in the words of many Republican speakers and interviewees. Well, this is a change of emphasis for obviously political reasons, but I will concede it can be argued that it is not an inaccurate description.

Then, from some speakers, I believe, the nation began to hear of something called the “Harris-Biden Administration.” I don’t think anyone has gone so far as to call it the “Harris Administration” yet, but wait a minute–maybe someone will. What really gets to me, of course, is that there’s a deep lie in all of this. Frequently Trump and his supporters make references to “when she was in power” or words to that effect. Well, she never was “in power” in this Administration. The President has power, the Vice-President, influence. That influence may be very important, maybe the deciding factor in some cases, but it’s still influence, not power. So a reasonable answer to the implied if not stated “why didn’t you do something.” could be, “Hey, I wasn’t President.. Have you read the US Constitution recently?”

I don’t expect that to happen. But it does seem to me that this particular bit of hypocrisy and distortion on the Trumpies’ part ought to be called out in writing or on TV or both. I would suggest the VP herself do it. Or maybe Gov Walz. But it would be OK for a TV reporter/interviewer to spend at least a minute or two on it. No, it’s not the biggest deal in the campaign, but it is indicative of a mindset among Trump and his people that I think is worth noting.

Then, of course, there’s the possibly most threatening thing about the Trump campaign, his repeated and repeated threat to use the government to restrict or entirely wipe out the freedom of his political opponents. He speaks of the national guard and the military and I think he may mean it. Of course his more immediate threat, to use them on election day or just after it is patently ridiculous. Even if he wins, according to the Constitution he would still have over a two month wait to actually assume the office. The sitting President would remain the sitting President until that time and I think Joe will behave with decency and common sense up to the end of his term

What he means by the rest is a little bit undefined, but he clearly means he would use his position as President to curb opposition and criticism and maybe even regular political activity(like seeking office). Whether he means this or is just bluffing I don’t know, but if it’s the latter it’s not only in poor taste, it actually may weaken the Republic and its traditional freedoms. If it’s not a bluff he would be risking serious conflict in the courts, the federal government and possibly the streets.

3) Despite a certain amount of exaggeration by the media and perhaps other commentators(to say nothing of the Trumpies), it is likely true that the Harris campaign needs to do some things differently. This process of change may be beginning now and if so, it needs to continue. Harris is so clearly Trump’s superior in intelligence, understanding, empathy, truth telling, ordinary human decency and common sense that it is ridiculous that this is a close race. But that’s what nearly all the polls show and I won’t deny it. Some of this is due to certain peculiarities of the social-economic state of the US and the opinions of some of its citizens and may have little to do with the candidates themselves. But then there’s this …

Harris has had trouble making herself known to the American people. I don’t exactly understand why, but they still feel, many of them, that they don’t know her as they do Trump, Biden or other contemporary political figures. She needs to continue “introducing” herself in public appearance, TV, in person, whatever. She also is having trouble explaining satisfactorily what she would do as President. I personally feel I already know enough about her to make a reasonable estimate of what her foreign and domestic policies would be. But many do not feel this way.

So she needs to tell everyone straightforwardly, “I would deal with the economy in the following ways…” ” I would take the following attitude with the Russian-Ukrainian war …”. Or with the Gaza disaster or whatever. Of course, she should not paint herself into a corner with too many specific promises, but she does need to give a better impression of what she is likely to do. There is, as noted above, some indication this is already a work in progress and if so, it needs to continue and even improve a little bit.

She is usually a very good interview and I trust this will continue. She does occasionally miss one as she did the other day on the issue of what she would do differently from Biden. I think a good answer would have been something like,”Well, the overall pattern would be about the same as he and I both want basically the same things for our country and for the world. There might be a few changes in specifics and I may discover some of these along the way.” Of course, it would be good to have one or two differences in mind to mention at the time of the question so as to avoid sounding just like another politician.

We should know more in a few hours. She is about to take on Fox News which is gutsy and I hope productive. Anyway, it shows a wish for honesty and it shows political courage. What would a Trump interview with Rachel Maddow be like? Don’t waste a lot of time on it just consider it. Happy speculation!