The Atlantic's Endorsement: Kamala Harris for President
By: The Atlantic
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The Atlantic's endorsement
For the third time in eight years, Americans have to decide whether they want Donald Trump to be their president. No voter could be ignorant by now of who he is. Opinions about Trump aren't just hardened—they're dried out and exhausted. The man's character has been in our faces for so long, blatant and unchanging, that it kills the possibility of new thoughts, which explains the strange mix of boredom and dread in our politics. Whenever Trump senses any waning of public attention, he'll call his opponent a disgusting name, or dishonor the memory of fallen soldiers, or threaten to overturn the election if he loses, or vow to rule like a dictator if he wins. He knows that nothing he says is likely to change anyone's views.
Almost half the electorate supported Trump in 2016, and supported him again in 2020. This same split seems likely on November 5. Trump's support is fixed and impervious to argument. This election, like the last two, will be decided by an absurdly small percentage of voters in a handful of states.
Because one of the most personally malignant and politically dangerous candidates in American history was on the ballot, The Atlantic endorsed Trump's previous Democratic opponents—only the third and fourth endorsements since the magazine's founding, in 1857. We endorsed Abraham Lincoln for president in 1860 (though not, for reasons lost to history, in 1864). One hundred and four years later, we endorsed Lyndon B. Johnson for president. In 2016, we endorsed Hillary Clinton for more or less the same reason Johnson won this magazine's endorsement in 1964. Clinton was a credible candidate who would have made a competent president, but we endorsed her because she was running against a manifestly unstable and incompetent Republican nominee. The editors of this magazine in 1964 feared Barry Goldwater less for his positions than for his zealotry and seeming lack of self-restraint.
Of all Trump's insults, cruelties, abuses of power, corrupt dealings, and crimes, the event that proved the essential rightness of the endorsements of Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden took place on January 6, 2021, when Trump became the first American president to try to overturn an election and prevent the peaceful transfer of power.
This year, Trump is even more vicious and erratic than in the past, and the ideas of his closest advisers are more extreme. Trump has made clear that he would use a second term to consolidate unprecedented power in his own hands, punishing adversaries and pursuing a far-right agenda that most Americans don't want. "We believe that this election is a turning-point in our history," the magazine prophesied correctly when it endorsed Abraham Lincoln in 1860. This year's election is another.
From the January/February 2024 issue: If Trump wins
About the candidate we are endorsing: The Atlantic is a heterodox place, staffed by freethinkers, and for some of us, Kamala Harris's policy views are too centrist, while for others they're too liberal. The process that led to her nomination was flawed, and she's been cagey in keeping the public and press from getting to know her as well as they should. But we know a few things for sure. Having devoted her life to public service, Harris respects the law and the Constitution. She believes in the freedom, equality, and dignity of all Americans. She's untainted by corruption, let alone a felony record or a history of sexual assault. She doesn't embarrass her compatriots with her language and behavior, or pit them against one another. She doesn't curry favor with dictators. She won't abuse the power of the highest office in order to keep it. She believes in democracy. These, and not any specific policy positions, are the reasons The Atlantic is endorsing her.
This endorsement will not be controversial to Trump's antagonists. Nor will it matter to his supporters. But to the voters who don't much care for either candidate, and who will decide the country's fate, it is not enough to list Harris's strengths or write a bill of obvious particulars against Trump. The main reason for those ambivalent Americans to vote for Harris has little to do with policy or partisanship. It's this: Electing her and defeating him is the only way to release us from the political nightmare in which we're trapped and bring us to the next phase of the American experiment.
Trump isn't solely responsible for this age of poisonous rhetoric, hateful name-calling, conspiracies and lies, divided families and communities, cowardly leaders and deluded followers—but as long as Trump still sits atop the Republican Party, it will not end. His power depends on lowering the country into a feverish state of fear and rage where Americans turn on one another. For the millions of alienated and politically homeless voters who despise what the country has become and believe it can do better, sending Trump into retirement is the necessary first step.
If you're a conservative who can't abide Harris's tax and immigration policies, but who is also offended by the rottenness of the Republican Party, only Trump's final defeat will allow your party to return to health—then you'll be free to oppose President Harris wholeheartedly. Like you, we wish for the return of the Republican Party of Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney, a party animated by actual ideas. We believe that American politics are healthiest when vibrant conservative and liberal parties fight it out on matters of policy.
If you're a progressive who thinks the Democratic Party is a tool of corporate America, talk to someone who still can't forgive themselves for voting for Ralph Nader in 2000—then ask yourself which candidate, Harris or Trump, would give you any leverage to push for policies you care about.
And if you're one of the many Americans who can't stand politics and just want to opt out, remember that under democracy, inaction is also an action; that no one ever has clean hands; and that, as our 1860 editorial said, "nothing can absolve us from doing our best to look at all public questions as citizens, and therefore in some sort as administrators and rulers." In other words, voting is a right that makes you responsible.
Trump is the sphinx who stands in the way of America entering a more hopeful future. In Greek mythology, the sphinx killed every traveler who failed to answer her riddle, until Oedipus finally solved it, causing the monster's demise. The answer to Trump lies in every American's hands. Then he needs only to go away.
This article appears in the November 2024 print edition with the headline "Kamala Harris for President."
Tags
Who is online
417 visitors
Rupert Murdock and Fox fascism is responsible.
They gave low IQ idiots a voice.
And should he lose the election, he has forecast and encouraged his followers to do what is necessary to restore his power. A fool’s errand.
He, at best, is but a paper tiger and when push comes to shove, his sycophants will wilt and be left to empty words…evidence of such already abundant hereabouts.
A hopeful outcome given the alternative…should actual violence be further encouraged.
He has? How so? Post your source
Chirp Chirp chirp....
He's still fighting his last loss. Only a fool digs deeper.
Trump knows that if he loses the election that he will go to prison for a very long time (as he should).
A lot of evil lurks in Kamala's heart, as the "Shadow" and everyone else on the planet has witnessed and confirmed.
A better choice for the Republicans would have been DeSantis and Haley, but the leftists would have demonized them as much or more than they do Trump. The country cannot endure another four years of the radical left destroying our great nation.
Trump certainly has his faults, but to elect Harris and Walz would be irrational, irresponsible, and unpatriotic.
based on what?
Her radical left progressive views, statements, and policy positions, both in the past and currently.
It's all there if you do a bit of research.
How would any of that equate with hate?
Progressive views sound pretty good to me.
It would mean so much to this group if you listed a 'few' or 'lot' of those faults some trumpists find in Crooked Donald. Please, go ahead. . . .
Good Lord man, America has survived far worse many times.
It sure has, and it survived Trump's first term. Things didn't start to go downhill until Biden was elected.
The nation and the American people are resilient enough to survive another Trump term.
Yeah, like the previous 4 years. Well, except for the 1/2 million COVID deaths due to Trump's lack of leadership or response to the pandemic.
Nothing permanently good can come out of a second Trump presidency.
And with the benefit of a vaccine and treatments his entire presidency thanks to trump, Biden still managed to kill more, Americans, so obviously Biden did a worse job than Trump, right?
Biden said that since there were so many deaths during his term, he should have been removed from office and many leftists agreed and repeated that sentiment.
Fast forward more than twice the number of COVID deaths under Biden, why did we never hear leftists state the same about Biden.
Afterall, they are all about fairness, right? s/
Thanks to the scientists developing mNRA vaccines long before.
What makes you think those twice as many would not have died under Trump had he won in 2020, some exotic light beaming from his squinty eyes?
You don't know but that is not my point.
Here it is again.....
Biden said that since there were so many deaths during his term, he should have been removed from office and many leftists agreed and repeated that sentiment.
Fast forward more than twice the number of COVID deaths under Biden, why did we never hear leftists state the same about Biden.
Either "his" or "he" should be replaced with Trump for clarity. Onwards!
OK...How about this for your clarity...
Biden said that since there were so many deaths during Trump's, Trump should have been removed from office and many leftists agreed and repeated that sentiment.
Hope that is clear to you now.
He was taking the advice of Fauci and Birx.
Country can't turn on a dime. Biden inherited a country in freefall due to the lack of a COVID response, he turned it around in remarkable time, but it was impossible to do it immediately.
Trump was partially, not as much as he claims, responsible for getting the vaccine available quickly. Then he did nothing with it.
Former 'president' deserves no credit whatsoever for a vaccine as any one with a lick of sense would know.
I will give credit where it is due. Crooked Donald did stand 'down' and get out of the way of Operation Warp-speed, because though the mRNA methodology was already in work/"long in the tank" so to speak, my understanding is, a sitting president, Donald at the time, could have let the processes lag, lapse, or drag along under its own weight. None of which would have been good for my, or anybody's family. That is, I give him credit for not being an obstinate jerk toward this specific methodology's deployment. And yes, that means Crooked Donald "signed off" permission for the
hastyrapid development of a, several, Covid-19 vaccines which four years later we, some, many, of us still receive (four years later).It takes nothing from me or anybody who cares about truth to openly admit when Crooked Donald has taken a correct action. It's what some of us pray for in asking/demanding he change course in his political life. The truth will always come out on its own, sooner or later anyway. And when truth appears I want to have been on its side all along!
Kind of. The developer of the 1st COVID vaccine did not take part in "Operation Warpspeed", so Trump was minimally involved in it. However what "Warpspeed" did allow was the cutting of federal red tape to allow the adoption and usage of that vaccine to move forward at high speed. BUT, like I noted, Trump had no plan after that and utterly failed at actually rolling out and promoting the vaccine.
I can agree with that. However to be clear, the issue at 3.3.14 for me was whether or not "Operation Warp-speed" began by Crooked Donald's administration is a credit to that administration. It was.
I had family members get sick and die during Covid-19 from the virus, and I worried over the other youths and elderly ones, respectively. Anything/anybody which worked to end the pandemic -especially WORLDWIDE (remember the pallet trucks in cities with dead bodies stacked up / India burning its Covid-19 dead) deserves my respect on that issue in its own right.
The concept was a credit, but the actual application was not. It could make as much of the vaccine as it wanted, but if it didn't include a plan for utilizing that vaccine, the credit was seriously overestimated.
He really deserves no credit for something that needed to be done in the first place.
I agree in part. I disagree in part too. Crooked Donald, as we all can see, is a hindrance to a great many things happening when he wants to be. . .even when it is not on his 'watch.' Case in point: Crooked Donald during this campaign has instigated (goaded) the Biden Administration to make a 'big and loud' presentation of what it will do for the losses and victims of Hurricanes: Helene and Milton. Prior to Crooked Donald's 'pot-banging' rhetoric about "hours/days/weeks" for FEMA actions to take place, the Biden Administration was taking a, let the professionals deal with the storms and damages, but: With Crooked Donald standing on the sidelines being a 'jeering jerk', the president himself is actually getting intimately involved (even sharing his phone number with state governors for direct calls if something "added" is needed) - if only to tamp down Crooked Donald's 'thunder.'
Crooked Donald could have interfered and 'stopped up' PFizer, Moderna, and et al. . . if he wanted to by lack of support or rhetoric against them and their products. Instead, he got his butt out of the way (and did not throw 'roadblocks at them; the effect being they would have strained 'heavily' to helping us all).
As we all surely know, a sitting president has one hell of a bully pulpit, and it yet remains to be seen how far down the rabbit hole one has to go to get around a president's ability to affect life-saving projects.
That doesn't say much - he didn't interfere or try 'to stopped up' - whatever that means - he had to approve the vaccine or 'stay out of the way' - it's foolish to support someone for something that they had no choice but to approve a vaccine and stay out of the way of its' implementation.
You're not the only one foolish enough though to give him credit for this - this credit is not due though.
The only advice he was taking was from obvious quackpots and whackjobs and conspiracy theorists.
Except Pfizer developed the 1st vaccine without the help of Trump and Warpspeed. Since it was a pandemic Pfizer knew there would be billions of dollars for whoever developed the 1st vaccine.
You are correct, and he could have hindered and delayed the vaccine from being approved for us in the US, however Pfizer would still have developed it at the same speed for sales outside the US.
As I said, Warpspeed was utilized well for development and production of the vaccine, but did not go into actual usage of the vaccine. It took Biden to get people inoculated and Trump's actions (along with certain right wing governors) actually prevented its wide spread adoption and usage. Florida, as 1 example, had thousands of additional COVID deaths because of the misinformation that the governor supported.
You know, you can think I am foolish all you wish. . . I stand by what I am sharing, because I know how it operated in my life (and worldview). I had family get sick and die during Covid-19 and this occurred with all the 'commotion' going on about vaccines, gloves, masks, and even breathing machines usages. I know about how long it takes vaccines to 'appear' out of nowhere. Also, I have a strong view about how much a president can do to 'eff-up' the works on vaccine production. For example, "new" president Biden could have came in and been LUKEWARM on the vaccines ("Operation Warpspeed) and the processes would have grinded to a halt. . . that is, the government would not have purchased or shipped any vaccines around the country. Of course, Pfizer, Moderna, et al would have not given the medicines freely, because "capitalism." Thus, we would have had millions of sick people 'everywhere' at any given moment making others sick and dying.
Our federal government got out of its own way, where Covid-19 was concerned. Even when the GOP did all it could to 'hate' on anything to do with Covid-19. . .and helping liberals.
I have expressed enough discontent with Crooked Donald for anybody to tell that I am not beholden to the man, his politics, or his 'mission' for the country. However, I am clear-and will remain so-that I never know just how many people are alive today because Donald did something 'good' once or several times during his administration.
I will not take that credit from him. As to whatever else he did wrong, it will deal with that—separately.
Aside from Pfizer doing its own efforts outside the country. . . above, you have explained why a president getting out of the way ('oiling the slide) is a "thousand times" better than one "poo-pooing" or laying out "thumbtacks" for others to get caught on as they progress down the metaphorical slide. . . .
The government paid Pfizer what it asked (or required) to continue 'perfecting' its wonder drug, the government also provided "promotional" services to a skeptical public of 'everybody' when it came to taking this new, modern, risky, 'creation.'
I will not minimize the government's role as a leading 'cog' in the continued, improving, and advanced development of the vaccines. I simply will not 'diss' Operation Warpspeed' -which made it possible for a new president (Biden) to hit the ground 'running' on distribution. . . and not product developments across the board.
Remember this one thing: The majority of the vaccinated public simply (and likely only) subjected itself to the 'shots' because the federal government was behind the product/s, plural. Had the federal government looked skeptical or askance at the vaccines. . . it is no telling what would have become of millions more of us before everything got decided.
It's ridiculous the way you defend him for something that he deserves absolutely no credit for - 'getting out of the way' is nonsense. It's dumb.
No, he deserves no credit. It's foolish.
I think we have a misunderstanding here. I am not dissing Operation Warpspeed, I am saying that the Trump administration did not stretch it long enough to include all phases. After the vaccine was developed and produced, that is where it ended. It should have included strategies for actual distribution.
I'll take radical left over radical right every day.
Far right fascism is as evil as it gets.
Hitler proved it.
I remember that 'situation' - Crooked Donald had no plans of leaving office so the story goes he got caught 'half-cocked' and let in a hurry. He did not even hand around for the new president inauguration.