Donald Trump has abandoned the core tenets of traditional Republican patriotism; Harris has claimed them for herself. She used Trump’s tasteless flirtations with dictators and his disgusting disrespect for the American men and women in uniform – fallen US soldiers are, for Trump, “suckers and losers” – to make a higher claim to patriotism. She would not “pander to autocrats.”
“As president,” she said, “I will never slacken in defending America’s security and ideals. Because in the ongoing struggle between democracy and tyranny, I know where I stand – and where the United States of America belongs.”
Illustration by John Shakespeare
“As Commander in Chief, I will ensure that America always has the strongest, most lethal military force in the world. I will honor our sacred obligation to care for our soldiers and their families. And I will always honor, never demean, their service and sacrifice.”
Likewise, Trump has abandoned the high ideals of the Republic – democracy, the rule of law, constitutionalism, which are a particular source of pride for traditional Republicans. Harris has taken their place.
“You can always count on me to put the country before my party and myself. I will uphold America’s sacred principles. From the rule of law to free and fair elections to the peaceful transfer of power.”
Bill Clinton once said that in the eyes of the American electorate, “strong and wrong is better than weak and right.” Kamala Harris is running her campaign as “strong and right.”
Beyond all these virtues was a spirit of optimism. While Trump’s message is a grim barrage of a “failing America” and an “American bloodbath,” Harris spoke optimistically of America as the land of “infinite possibilities.”
As she seeks to consolidate center-left support and win over center-right supporters, she has repudiated some of the policies she championed as a Democratic Left candidate in 2019. She has stopped calling for an end to fracking, stopped wanting to abolish private health insurance, and has ended her support for the “defund the police” movement. She has also taken a much tougher line on illegal immigration.
And while she called for an urgent ceasefire in Gaza in her acceptance speech, her campaign team refused to give any speaking time to the pro-Palestinian agitators among the Democratic delegates in the hall and their shock troops on the streets outside. In a four-day event, the campaign team could not find four minutes for the cause. A telling political signal.
What’s striking is that all of these claims and arguments are about values and beliefs, not economic ones. Harris puts a quasi-economic ideal at the center of her power politics – she will “rebuild the middle class.” That will be a crucial goal, she told us. And she ran through a checklist of measures, the same handful of tax and other proposals she nominated in a speech last week.
But the commitment to rebuilding the middle class is itself a statement of values. The middle class is defined in part by material wealth, but also by values such as commitment to family, community and nation, work ethic and respect for the law.
This seems odd. Americans consistently tell pollsters that economic issues are their top priority, so why did Harris only mention the cost of living once? Did she not make any commitments to job creation or economic growth, for example? Inflation, interest rates and income were not mentioned.
“These cultural issues are more important than the economic ones,” says California Governor Gavin Newsom, a longtime colleague and sometime rival of Harris’s in California’s Democratic milieu. “They trump everyone else,” he tells me.
Load
Newsom explains the changing political battlefield. Republicans, he says, have had tremendous success in waging the so-called culture wars. “This rightward shift in America is extraordinary. It takes us back to a pre-1960s world, America in reverse, with voting rights, civil rights, LGBTQ rights, women’s rights across the board. It’s not just about abortion.”
Newsom says that the Democrats had to deliver results on economic issues as a prerequisite, and that Joe Biden has delivered those results, but that culture and values have been used as an effective weapon against them:
“You know, CRT (critical race theory), DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion), ESG (environmental, social and governance), anything with three letters – DOJ, FBI, I mean, it’s just weaponized. It’s about fear, it’s about anger. These are old hands, but they’re very powerful. I’ve been very outspoken on LGBTQ issues, obviously marriage equality, but the attack on the trans community now is extraordinary, this kind of anti-woke agenda that’s just anti-Black.
“When people like Ron DeSantis (Republican Governor of Florida) talk about anti-woke, they mean anti-black, rewriting history, censoring historical facts. It’s a cultural cleansing. Their book-banning spree, their banning of speech in the boardroom, the gag orders, private speech, not just in the classroom. It’s extraordinary how effective they’ve been.”
Newsom says that while the front lines of this fight are at the state level, a Trump return would lead to nationalization. “If a bill for a nationwide abortion ban landed on his desk, he would sign it, there’s just no doubt about it.”
Trump has used immigration – and the blatant xenophobia he wraps it in – as the most powerful weapon in his political arsenal. But Newsom says the experience in California shows that anti-immigrant movements reach a natural limit and then face resistance.
In the early 1990s, Governor Pete Wilson tried to ban illegal immigrants from using public services. But that was too far-fetched. “It led to a countermovement and a counternarrative. It was the beginning of the end of the Republican Party in California,” once a Republican stronghold, now dominated by Democrats. “And I would say that is a warning today about what Trump and Trumpism are promoting.”
Trump promises the mass deportation of all illegal immigrants, an estimated 10 to 20 million people. Is he going too far?
The answer depends in part on Harris and the alternative she offers, and whether anyone outside the pajama party was listening to her. An early indication that she at least succeeded in changing the atmosphere was the treatment Fox News gave Donald Trump immediately after Harris’ acceptance speech.
Trump called Fox to voice his criticism, and they dutifully put him on the air. He launched into the familiar tirades against Harris, the Marxist, and how he was getting more and more support. Within minutes, the anchors seemed impatient with this old news. A minute later, they cut him off and kicked him off the air.
“In this country,” Harris said, “anything is possible.” And that is a fact.
Peter Hartcher is an international editor.
