"She’s done one debate. I’ve done two. It’s too late to do another. I’d love to, in many ways, but it’s too late. The voting is cast.”
And so Donald Trump seemingly closed the door in an address to his ardent followers in North Carolina to a further encounter with his rival, Vice President Kamala Harris. Harris immediately accepted the invitation from CNN to participate in a second clash in Atlanta on October 23rd, less than two weeks before the day when the eyes of the world will be on America, November 5th.
If that indeed is Trump’s final response, he is committing an unforced, potentially grave error. As a former adviser opined: “I like where President Trump stands,” yet “this race is super, super tight and, in that environment, I don’t think we should skip an opportunity to speak in front of a super large audience of Americans.” One ally, referring to Trump’s weak outing against Harris in Philadelphia on September 10th, argues that, in a rematch, he mustn’t “take the bait” and instead “focus on policy” because, if he does, “he wins.”
I concur. Although the 45th POTUS alleged that he clearly triumphed at the hopefuls’ first joust, the reaction of those who watched told a rather different story. Approximately 70% of those asked adjudged Harris the victor. The Democratic nominee kept Trump off balance from the beginning, striding straight up to him and extending her hand and subsequently asserting that his famed rallies were boring and that the crowds at them have been thinning.
Incandescent with rage at a woman he evidently cannot stomach, Trump wound up ranting incoherently and making the wholly uncorroborated, ludicrous claim that Haitians in Ohio are eating family pets. He did himself no favours on the night. That said, his strategists are dead on the money in citing his advantage on the two most important issues: inflation and immigration.
If he were to change course and do battle again with Harris, he would need to recapture the restraint he displayed both on June 27th, when President Joe Biden imploded on stage, and during the aftermath, as Democrats scrambled to get the senior statesman to abandon his ill-conceived bid. On inflation, a single line would suffice: “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?” The surveys repeatedly show that the vast majority of the citizenry say no, emphatically.
On immigration, he’d have to jettison the hyperbolic nonsense and appeal directly to the widespread sentiments that too many are crossing the southern border, hence placing communities in the vicinity and beyond under huge strain, and that the Biden/Harris administration has done a bad job of resolving what is perceived to be a serious problem. Lastly, Trump can contend persuasively that Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, are hard left on a range of subjects and completely out of step with Middle America on the culture wars.
Yes, it is an open question as to whether Trump can be so disciplined. Yes, it is a fact that the numbers haven’t moved much since she beat him soundly and that Trump/Vance and Harris/Walz are neck and neck. Yes, it might be risky. I still feel that the bombastic New Yorker would be crazy not to take the chance. And yes, the retort to my thinking on his mental state is obvious. But watch this space. I bet he’ll debate.
Can Sinn Féin come back?
The Irish political commentariat remains fixated on the date of the upcoming general election. While plenty of seasoned observers declare November 2024 with conviction, I am a member of the minority who suspects it will be February or March of 2025 for a host of reasons. At any rate, the negative trend for Sinn Féin continues unabated. Most recently, a Sunday Times poll has the party at 18%, down 9% since May and well off their lofty heights in the mid-30s they reached not so long ago. Simultaneously, the historic big beasts and current largest government parties, Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil, must be happy with their climbs to 24% and 20%, respectively.
The emergence of immigration as a hot potato has eroded some of Sinn Féin’s working class base. There is definitely a cadre of women and men who voted reliably for its candidates in the past, even as they had radically divergent perspectives on the arrival of newcomers and other controversial topics than the leadership. A good chunk of them have drifted to right-wing groupings and individuals. They may have been equally put off by Sinn Féin’s friendly gesturing toward “the establishment” – which they detest – in anticipation of assuming power.
When Sinn Féin sought to reassure elements of this vital cohort by pivoting on immigration, etc., they apparently lost support from younger progressives attracted to Sinn Féin especially by the trenchant advocacy of Eoin Ó Broin on the housing crisis. All of the above has precipitated a perfect storm for Mary Lou McDonald and Co.
In the wake of their fairly abysmal performance in June’s local and European elections, the talk was of restoring “authenticity” in messaging and “getting back to basics.” Any shift in style or substance has neither been detected nor paid dividends thus far. McDonald who, together with her husband, has been through a trying period of poor health, has a mammoth task ahead of her. At the moment, Sinn Féin is unmoored, flailing. There are no easy answers to the quandary they face.
In defence of centrism
The global political climate is turning increasingly hostile to centrists like this writer. Holding positions that are somewhere between the two extremes is alternatively deemed cowardly or indicative of a “sneaking regard” for the left or the right, depending on the outlook of the enemy of moderation. Occupants of the poles have their difficulties with us. Here are my objections to them, with the caveat that these are prevalent, not universal, characteristics.
People on the right demonstrate scant empathy with or sympathy for their fellow human beings who are struggling or hurting. What galls is that their attitudes often are at odds with the religious faith they profess and from which their belief systems are typically derived. Moreover, in American parlance, lots of uncompromising conservatives were born on third base and are certain that they hit a triple. Not everyone benefits from the accident of birth.
Their foes on the left are so convinced of the moral and broader superiority of their point of view that it is extraordinarily troubling to them – near incomprehensible – that others actually consider things differently. And when/if leftists manage to admit that reality, they instinctively presume that those who they disagree with have the very worst motives in their hearts and minds and/or are just plain ignorant and stupid.
I humbly reflect on my parents’ sage, albeit simplistic, advice: the truth is usually somewhere in the middle.
Larry Donnelly is a Boston attorney, a Law Lecturer at the University of Galway and a frequent media commentator on politics, current affairs and law in Ireland and the US. Twitter/X: @LarryPDonnelly
Larry Donnelly