The vulgar vs. the divisive: I know who I’d vote for

Who will win? That’s a 50-50.

Much as I admire America, there are several reasons I’m glad I was born an Australian, not an American. Having spent the past month in America I’m reminded of one of them: I don’t have to choose between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. I’d want a president who would do just four things and do them with vigour.

First, the president needs a clear, unambiguous and unequivocal way to deter the adversaries of the West. In Ukraine that means giving the Ukrainians the weapons to destroy Russian logistical support for Vladimir Putin’s invasion, including within Russian borders. Around a half-million people have died as a result of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. The war will end only when the Russians know they can never win.

In the Middle East I want a president who understands that Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis are surrogates of Iran.

The Iranians need to know they call off their attacks on our friends and allies or they will suffer from asphyxiating sanctions from the US and its allies. What is more, there will be zero tolerance of terrorist attacks on Israel and the Gulf states. Let’s demand Iran supports a two-state solution in the Middle East, then we can talk peace. It will never happen until Iran accepts that proposition.

And the president needs to tell China it wants peaceful coexistence under international law. Trying to change the status quo by force in the South China Sea and Taiwan is unacceptable.

Second, I want a president who embraces economic rationality. Someone who understands free trade is a key to global prosperity. Who understands tariffs are just a tax on consumers, increasing costs in supermarkets and giving bonuses to domestic rent-seekers. And who understands that America should use not just its military power but also its huge economic power to open up global markets to stimulate economic growth worldwide.

I’d want a president who understands that the US government needs to spend within its limits, reducing the US budget deficit and reducing government debt, which is now 120 per cent of GDP. Who knows that too much spending ends up being inflationary and taxes set too high will destroy investment and incentive.

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin

Third, I’d want to president who embraces immigration. But at the same time I wouldn’t want to have a president who thought migration should be uncontrolled – who let people smugglers game the refugee convention and flood the borders with illegal migrants.

I know legal immigration is popular enough but illegal random immigration is deeply divisive in society.

And, finally, I really would want a president who tried to bring the country together as best they possibly could. I despise political leaders who salami-slice society into racial or ethnic groups, setting one group against the other. It is one of the ugliest characteristics of our era that has emerged from critical theory. It is just reprehensible.

So I judge Trump and Harris against these four criteria. As Vice-President, Harris has been largely unknown on foreign policy issues. Trump was the president for four years so we can judge him by his record in office. Trump was aggressive towards Iran, pursuing a maximum-pressure policy. He also has made it clear he will not tolerate Iran supporting surrogates to attack America’s friends and allies. Harris is less pro-Israeli than President Joe Biden, meaning she would cut more slack to Iran and its surrogates. That would worry me.

Donald Trump

In the Indo-Pacific there is no reason to believe Harris or Trump would change Biden’s policies on AUKUS, the Quad and the strategy of deterrence of China. Harris would continue supporting Ukraine, although the extent to which she would is unknown. As for Trump, I think he would push for an end to the killing and explore with the Russians whether there was a credible basis for a ceasefire. In the meantime, he would continue American support for the Ukrainians.

Russia, China and Iran see Trump as unpredictable. Harris might be more hesitant and uncertain about what to do. Trump would probably be more aggressive than Harris towards America’s adversaries, and that may be a good thing.

When it comes to economics, Harris has shown no enthusiasm for free trade: she opposed the Trans-Pacific Partnership when she was a senator and voted against the renewed US, Canada and Mexico trade agreement.

But Trump has spoken of introducing a 10 per cent tariff on imports and much higher tariffs on imports from countries such as China. This could trigger a worldwide trade war that would diminish global GDP.

Of the two, Harris would probably be slightly less bad than Trump, but neither would lead on free trade. Neither Harris nor Trump shows any interest in reining in the budget deficit but Trump would be committed to retaining the 21 per cent corporate tax rate in the US whereas the signs are Harris would like to increase that tax to 35 per cent. So Trump is more pro private sector investment and Harris would expand welfare entitlements.

Kamala Harris

Trump is famous for his strong stand against illegal immigration. Harris, as part of the Biden administration, has a poor record. Something like 10 million immigrants have entered the US during her time as Vice-President, and she was designated by Biden as the person responsible for reducing illegal immigration.

Like most people of the left, she lacks enthusiasm for securing the border. Such measures as she would be prepared to take would be driven by political expediency, not commitment.

The worst feature of Trump is his vulgarity. But to claim he’s a threat to democracy, is a fascist and hates women (really?) is just ridiculous partisan rhetoric. The worst feature of Harris is her commitment to critical theory, racial politics and salami-slicing society according to gender, sexual preference and race. This fashion, which has spread from California to much of the English-speaking world, has been driven by people such as Harris. So that’s the choice: the vulgar or the divisive.

In the end I don’t have a vote. But if I did, I’d close my eyes and vote for Trump. Who will win? That’s a 50-50.

Alexander Downer was foreign minister from 1996 to 2007 and high commissioner to the UK from 2014 to 2018.