OPINION:
Some of life’s greatest wisdom comes from sports cliches. Among the greatest nuggets is the notion that to be the best you have to beat the best. We hear coaches say it. We hear players say it. In boxing the all-time greats are often considered such because of whom they fought.
Sugar Ray Leonard is always mentioned among the best of the best not only because he won so many fights, but because he beat the best of his era. He never ducked an opponent and thrived on rising to the big moment, not avoiding it. That earned respect. That earned credibility. That earned admiration.
Sadly, we see no such desire to rise to that challenge in American politics today. Vice President Kamala Harris, the last-minute replacement for a feeble and seldom available President Biden, has spent her few weeks as a candidate dodging the media.
On the rare occasion, she has fielded a serious question, such as specifically what she would do to combat inflation, which she calls price gouging at grocery stores, her answer is typically something along the lines of “I was raised in a middle class family.” In fact when asked about the border, about international affairs or about energy policy, her answers are every bit as avoidant. There are no specifics ever.
Recently the vice president decided to do a charm offensive, sitting down with multiple media outlets. That sounds great until you look at the list of whom she spoke with, which included Oprah Winfrey, liberal comedian Stephen Colbert and the ladies of “The View,” where they introduced Ms. Harris as “the next president of the United States.” Everyone was compliant, tossing softball questions and cheerleading Ms. Harris.
None of the lightweight interviews gave us anything new. Even on the CBS News show “60 Minutes,” typically a more serious news venue, video evidence shows that the Harris interview was selectively edited before broadcast to make her vague answers seem sharper and quicker. Why do heavy lifting when the editors will do it for you?
The most telling moment came during “The View,” in which Ms. Harris acknowledged she wouldn’t do anything different than Mr. Biden had. It was an odd statement for someone who’s advertising campaign revolves around the word and concept of “change” and vows on its website a capitalized “New Way Forward.”
The vice president’s aversion to legitimate news interviews, one which pushes for details on what would be her energy policy, what she would do at the border, how she would approach the effort for a ceasefire in Gaza, is alarming. Equally alarming is much of the media’s willingness to simply be part of the blue team, refusing to press real questions.
All this does not excuse Donald Trump however.
The former president’s unwillingness to participate in any further debates wreaks of weakness. Whether it is his intent or not, the man who loves to project strength is doing just the opposite.
Would boxing historians think as highly of Leonard if he had ducked fights with Roberto Duran or Marvin Hagler? No. He earned respect by taking on all comers. On the other hand, Mr. Trump, who underperformed badly in his only debate with Kamala Harris, has apparently decided he couldn’t do any better in a rematch and has just bailed out altogether.
Mr. Trump often takes pages from the Ronald Reagan playbook. The phrase “Make America Great Again” actually is a variation of one of Reagan’s 1984 reelection catch-phrases, “President Reagan, Making America Great Again.” Trump should take another lesson from that 1984 campaign.
Reagan had two debates with Democrat Walter Mondale. Few seem to remember, but in the first debate Reagan stumbled badly, looking elderly and out of sync. In their second debate Reagan staged a comeback. He dominated Mondale, including tossing out the memorable line about age and “not exploiting my opponent’s youth and inexperience.” His light-hearted comment defused the age issue and his brilliant performance in that second debate set the stage for his 49-state landslide.
Mr. Trump could have scheduled a second debate with Ms. Harris. He could have prepared for it. He could have learned the lesson not to take the bait of her ego-piercing jabs about crowds. More than 67 million Americans watched the first debate. It’s likely that number would have been even larger for a second debate. For Mr. Trump to duck the chance to show nearly half the number of people who will vote in his election that he can do better, that he has specific answers and most importantly, that he is willing to go on the big stage when the stakes are at their highest, was a huge mistake.
Being president of the United States may be the single toughest job on earth. As the leader of the free world, the president must not only find solutions for 330 million Americans, but make decisions that will affect billions of people around the globe. Having a leader who refuses to take or answer questions about how she would handle some of the largest of those challenges is unacceptable. Equally unacceptable is a leader who dodges a confrontation with the one person (or three, counting moderators) who stands between him and returning to the White House.
In order to be the best, you’ve got to beat the best. You’ve got to fight the fight, answer the questions and stare down your opponent in the largest public arena. Apparently neither 2024 presidential candidate actually aspires to be the best.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.