AUGUST 24, 2924 – (Cont.) As fully expected, Scott Jennings, a Republican surrogate and contract commentator on CNN, criticized KAM-ala’s acceptance speech for the absence of any policy substance. In keeping with his usual civility, he did compliment her style and presidential appearance. As to substance, Jennings was largely correct in one regard but way off the mark in another, more critical respect.
Harris did not recite any multi-point blueprint for curing inflation (once and for all!); stopping all illegal migration; ending (in her first 24 hours in office), Russia’s assault on Ukraine or Israel’s crushing destruction of human lives in Gaza; or (while we’re at it) all other world problems. Nor did the Democratic standard-bearer lay out a five-point brief to convince intellectually sloppy but propagandistically geared Republicans that she is neither “extreme” nor “Marxist” in her economic views, however left-of-Libertarian she might be more accurately cast.
What Jennings overlooked, however, is the central point of a presidential nomination acceptance speech: it’s not supposed to include specific policy points—technically, Oval Office legislative agenda points dependent on marshalling adequate support among members of Congress, who are the masters of sausage-making. Unlike a State of the Union speech, which focuses in large part on a president’s legislative agenda, an acceptance speech is the quintessential political speech; a rousing overture to a grand opera, the magnum opus of the American political process; a work designed to motivate the choir of loyalists, as well as to inspire the congregation of citizenry—be they loyalists, skeptics or opponents.
The biggest perennial challenge faced by any candidate for president at every phase of a campaign is the general misperception among voters that the office of president is far more powerful than it is in reality. No magic wand has ever been conferred upon a president. Nor has the power to adopt legislation or appropriate funding. Sure, the president has veto power over laws passed by Congress—the legislative branch of government—but by a two-thirds majority (House and Senate) Congress can override a veto. In addition, the president can issue executive orders but only if sanctioned under Article II of the Constitution or by authority delegated by Congress. Accordingly, presidents receive far too much credit when things go right and far too much blame when things go wrong.
None of which is to suggest that the president is a powerless figurehead. The Chief Executive Officer of the U.S. has very substantial powers, not the least of which is his (so far—but not for long!) control and management of far flung federal administrative agencies and a legislative agenda—depending on the composition of Congress and the president’s political skill and experience in jaw-bonding, manipulating, arm-twisting, compromising, and old-fashioned horse-trading. A promise to do one thing or another in any policy realm depends on a whole lot more than the points of a plan.
Given the limitations imposed on a president’s multi-point plan to address any issue, what becomes far more important in sizing up a presidential candidate is character. A person’s character, in turn, is reflected by their adherence to principle: respect for the rule of law, for example, and justice, civility and integrity. KAMA-la’s speech underscored her principles and thus, her character.
Just before KAMA-la’s acceptance speech, former Republican Representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois gave a powerful speech in her support. He stressed that policy differences are far less important than principles, and he stated forcefully, convincingly, that based on principles and character, Harris should receive our support.
Over the rest of the campaign, we will doubtless hear various policy “slants” from Harris. Any given voter might agree with all, some or none of them. What will be front and center, however, will be her character. The best policy for us is to focus on that crucial factor; to convince people within our circles of influence just how critical character is and that on that score, Harris will win convincingly.
Subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
© 2024 by Eric Nilsson
