Of two convicted politicians, only one has earned a second chance

Later this year, within 10 days of each other, voters on both sides of the Pacific will decide whether to elect a convicted felon to office.

In Queensland, Katter’s Australian Party candidate Michael Pugh will be trying to upset Labor incumbent Les Walker and the LNP’s Janelle Poole in the Townsville-based seat of Mundingburra, having just publicly disclosed his violent criminal history.

Across the pond, former US president Donald Trump will be trying to reclaim the White House, months after being found guilty of falsifying business records to help cover up an illegal election influence scheme.

(Sadly for American voters, the more serious criminal charges Trump faces for attempting to overthrow the 2020 election and stealing classified material will not be heard before voters go to the polls.)

Both are weighty decisions for voters, but that is where the similarities between Trump and Pugh end.

For starters, the two elections have very different things at stake.

Donald Trump points the finger of blame for his conviction at everyone but himself.Credit: AP

In one, the most powerful Western democracy risks descending into authoritarianism; in the other, one small, but prized, green seat in an old sandstone building at the end of George Street is up for grabs.

Then there are the offences themselves. Trump’s offending was non-violent, but may have had history-altering ramifications.

By conspiring to withhold information from the voting public, at a time when the Access Hollywood recording had already engulfed his campaign in scandal, Trump put his thumb on the scales of the electoral process. In a race that was ultimately decided by fewer than 80,000 votes in three states, it may well have been decisive.

The political motivation for bringing Trump to trial is open to some debate. What is not open to debate, however, is his guilt – it was a free and fair trial and a jury of Trump’s peers examined the evidence and came to a judgment.

Just as it should be.

Pugh’s offending was violent and terrifying. Along with accomplices, an armed 21-year-old Pugh threatened three people in a Currajong home with a bayonet. He received an 18-month suspended sentence.

And it was more than two non-offending decades ago.

But perhaps the most striking difference is the character of the two candidates – and the power of redemption and second chances. On that metric, at least, Pugh leaves Trump in his wake.

Let’s compare the pair.

The following quotes from Pugh came from an interview with our colleague, Bill McDonald, on 4BC. The Trump quotes came from his long-winded speech at Trump Tower the day after his guilty verdict.

Pugh: “I’m not proud of the Michael Pugh and the decisions he made 22 or 23 years ago, but I am proud of the person, the man and father, that I am today.”

Trump: “It was a rigged trial. We wanted a venue change where we could have a fair trial. We didn’t get it. We wanted a judge change. We wanted a judge that wasn’t conflicted, and, obviously, he didn’t do that. Nobody’s ever seen anything like it.”

Pugh: “I mean, it could have gone the other way, but it didn’t, and I’ll always be very grateful for that. It’s allowed me to become heavily involved in my community, become a father, and become a person that I’m proud of.”

Trump: “People, they were able to use people, salacious. By the way, and nothing ever happened. There was no anything. Nothing ever happened. And they know it. But they were salacious as they could be.”

Pugh: “Some might say it’s fortunate and others might say it’s unfortunate to have that lived experience, but I wouldn’t be where I am today, and I wouldn’t be in a position where I can help others going through similar times.”

Trump: “We’re dealing with a corrupt government. We have a corrupt country. Our elections are corrupt. Our borders are open. Our borders are going to be closed very soon. November 5th is going to be the most important day in the history of our country.”

And there is the rub – Pugh is repentant. He has owned up to, and paid the price for, his horrific crimes. He has earned his second chance.

The question of whether he has earned a seat in state parliament is much more vexed. Ultimately, that will be a question for the informed voters of Mundingburra, but Pugh has certainly earned the right to run.

But that’s probably moot. Given KAP got just 12.16 per cent of Mundingburra’s primary vote in 2020, the sad reality is it’s the unrepentant criminal who has the better chance of being elevated to public office in 2024.

Stormy days ahead, indeed.