Biden versus Trump II

We're doing this again?

Nearly 4 years later I still feel basically the same.¹

If I invited you to come across town on a Saturday night to watch two baboons throw feces at each other for 30 minutes and then vote on a "winner" all to be followed by an hour-long speech by the "winning" baboon's sponsor, would you be interested? Before you answer, tell me again why you would bother to vote for Biden or Trump.

What makes either idea (baboon judging or Presidential voting) desirable? How can you justify the dishonor of participating in either spectacle?

As I've said before, the differences between these two are slight and generally unimportant. The alignment between them in policy and principles (to the degree they can claim any) is perhaps the most underappreciated aspect among the electorate in this election.

Where there is daylight, it is in places few of their respective detractors recognize.

Let me stress that both are crooks, liars, and thieves. And both are cronyistic swamp dwellers. Yet one distinction is that while being himself a crony (principal and agent to), Trump isn't cronyistic enough. Or at least he is not in the right ways.

The things that would benefit Trump are not sufficiently aligned with the interests of the American people and to the benefit of the nation. This is probably true of Biden as well, but Biden's alignment is importantly better relative to Trump.

Rather than dive deeply into examples for the sake of argument, I'll take the weaker road of arguing by analogy.

The worry with Biden is that he will become beholden to the extreme elements of his party as a compromise to keep their support. Mostly this amounts to throwing them bones like the LNG export ban.

The worry with Trump is that he will become beholden to the extreme elements of his party as a tool to keep power and prestige. This is more dangerous because it is a greater yielding of control to these extreme interests. He has no desire to limit them in their reach as long as he continues to gain by their gain. For Biden this transaction is a cost. For Trump it is a revenue (sometimes literally).

Another area where there is daylight between them is in the chief criticism each comes under both from their respective opponents/detractors as well as from within. For Biden the complaint is that he has been a sloppy administrator. While this relates to charges of cognitive and physical decline, it is better put when focusing on how well or poorly things are going. The border crisis is the main example. The exit from Afghanistan is the biggest early one from his presidency. When it comes to selections and appointments (VP, cabinet posts, court nominees, etc.), the silent-part-out-loud coopted as a marketing attribute is another.

For all of these and so many more examples there are two sources of criticism. One is with the policies themselves. The other, which is the one I am keying in on here, is with the execution of the policies. Trump supported and instigated withdrawal from Afghanistan even though he didn't do it. Trump obviously wants border security and order. He didn't face anything like the immigration surge Biden has faced, but he wasn't too different policy-wise. Or maybe I should say Biden hasn't been very different as he has deported at a slightly higher rate, continued to build the wall, and more or less carried on with most of Trump's immigration policies otherwise.

Trump himself campaigned in 2016 partially on the idea that he could get things done. He didn't, but his failures were never as stark and obvious as have been Biden's. People who wanted him to drain the swamp don't think he failed for lack of trying. People who didn't want him to drain the swamp don't care that he didn't do it—they're just glad he didn't.

For Trump the chief criticism is that he lacks virtuous principles. His supporters have to spend a lot of time and effort on apologizing away his despicability. They do mental gymnastics to rationalize what he says and apparently believes. Pay no attention to what these folks said about Bill Clinton, et al. when it comes to character. It is either "different in this case" or "a devil-you-know-and-can-use strategy".

In this area of daylight I'll take the guy trying to do the right thing even if I don't agree with his definition of right thing quite often over the guy actively trying to do the wrong thing.

An area of daylight where Trump has the advantage is in judicial and other appointments. Related to this would be his track record on rolling back stopping the bleeding when it comes to the growth of the regulatory state. I group these together because I am not confident at all that in a second term we can count on these at all to be the case. He is much less likely to defer to sources like the Federalist Society to make judicial appointments. For those who like what we got in his first term, this is a loss. For those who opposed this source of nominees the alternative is probably even worse. Reducing regulation likely will only be an afterthought at best in a second term. Considering the importance of surrounding cast, both the type of person who will get offered the job and the type who would accept it is very likely materially worse in a second Trump administration. Look no further than the composition changes during the first term as well as what Trump himself has said regarding those who came and went.

So this area of daylight possibly also swings to Biden as we can be hopeful Biden won't be beholden to his extreme base while we should fear Trump will be.

The recent politics around banning or forcing a Chinese divestment of TikTok are a great case in point. The Biden campaign almost simultaneously launched its own TikTok account as Biden indicated support for the bill in Congress that would force a TikTok sale to U.S. investors. Biden is playing politics compromising by showing a tough stance against the CCP vis-a-via the bully pulpit—true even if he goes so far as to sign the bad and unconstitutional legislation. Trump on the other hand has gone from a “consistent” position against TikTok to supporting it ever since a new major donor to Trump came on board—one who happens to have a big stake in the platform. While this accidentally puts Trump on the right side of the issue in my estimation, it is for all the wrong reasons.

But What About The VP?

I’ve gotten a long way into this without addressing one really big Biden shortcoming: Kamala Harris. Given Biden’s age and perhaps some things we’ve seen from him physically and mentally (these tend to get overemphasized), it is very reasonable to put extra concern into the Vice President. Harris is quite bad. Everything I would criticize Biden for I would generally say was as bad or worse with Harris.

Yet we must ask: compared to what? Since Trump is as likely as Biden to not complete his term (perhaps less attributable to health risk and more attributable to impeachment/removal risk), the calculus is similar between the two candidates. A Trump pick has not been determined. Given the probable field, which as of this writing has Tim Scott (23%), Kristi Noem (18%), Tulsi Gabbard (11%), and Elise Stefanik (9%), I would say Trump looks preferrable. This is just considering these potential people in comparison to Harris. Like all of this, it is generally degrees of losing.

The Ultimate Point of This Post

You may notice that the focus of this post is most about who is qualified between these two horrible candidates to be president in an epistemic sense. I’m not getting into a lot of specific policy differences or marginal wins on the important issues. That is because regardless of the fact that Trump might bring better outcomes (and the word might is doing a lot of work here), the fact is he has proven to be an absolutely disqualified candidate because of character and the existential threat he poses.

The parallel to the last season of the show Billions, which is no coincidence, is very apt. An obvious willingness to conduct himself as if he were above the law—a feature that he not only doesn’t deny but fully embraces—rises in importance above any other benefits he might bring at the margin.

He is either so delusional as to believe he actually won the 2020 election or he is evil enough to attempt to steal it that he cannot be trusted with the highest office.

From any reasonable reading, Biden is probably not far behind. He has certainly engaged in activities and behavior that is fully impeachable and worthy of removal from office. Instituting policies like student loan forgiveness and eviction/rent moratoriums knowing that they were unconstitutional is it itself grounds for dismissal if not full disqualification from running again. Yet forgive me for splitting hairs between the two.

When I look at Biden, I see a President who should not be President. When I look at Trump, I see a President who cannot be President. You can call that a distinction without a difference, and that is fine. The purpose of this post is to tell you you cannot be justified in voting for either of them. And when you rightfully do not do so, know that in not voting for Trump you are choosing to avoid the greater of two evils.

1. Why is this post so early in the process? Well, I’m hopeful that one way or another it won’t be applicable come this fall.