Trump as Trump is the only option

Let Trump be Trump. For one thing, there’s no other option.

That’s a lesson from past presidential campaigns that neither family members nor political strategists nor admakers can defy. The same is true for the other side: Let Hillary be Hillary.

Let’s stipulate that campaigns are too long, too driven by the occasional misstep and too little focused on the policies the prospective presidents would pursue in office. But, as I cover my 10th campaign, I’d argue that the length and scrutiny of campaigns also give voters a glimpse into some of the qualities that matter most in the leader they’ll entrust with their country.

In the course of the first campaign I covered, in 1980, Ronald Reagan convinced skeptical voters, unhappy with the leadership of President Jimmy Carter, that the conservative hero and former California governor was a person they could trust to be commander in chief. In 1988, Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis, who came out of the Democratic convention with a formidable 17- point lead, inadvertently ended up convincing voters that he didn’t have the energy and passion they wanted.

Neither outcome was preordained when the general election campaign began. In both, voters came to their conclusions before reporters and pundits fully understood them.

Those decisions weren’t driven by ideology. The online surveys that match voters with the candidate they most closely align with on specific issue posi- tions miss the point. Ideology matters, of course, but in many ways, the presidential election is less policy- driven than those for other offices. Voters understand that the most critical challenges presidents face are often ones that were barely mentioned in the campaigns that elected them.

You don’t have to go far back in history for examples. Barack Obama campaigned in 2008 on transforming the nation’s polarized politics when the financial meltdown made his first order of business in the White House avoiding another depression. Though George W. Bush pitched himself as a “compassionate conservative” in the 2000 campaign, his presidency was defined by the 9/ 11 terror attacks and the wars that followed.

At the moment, Trump and Clinton are proving the point. In political ads or on the stump, neither campaign is talking mostly about tax policy or a health care overhaul or NATO’s future. Instead, each attacks the opponent as lacking the core qualities needed in a president. It’s about characteristics that come through regardless of any attempts at political plastic surgery during a campaign.

Does Hillary Clinton lack the mental and physical stamina to serve as president, as Trump asserts? After a year- long primary marathon and a nine- week general- election sprint after Labor Day, voters will be able to decide for themselves how vigorous she is.

Does Donald Trump lack the temperament and knowledge to trust him as president, as Clinton argues? Three 90- minute debates, assuming they take place as proposed by the Commission on Presidential Debates, will let viewers see for themselves how he handles questions and follow- ups more intensive than those in primary debates, when the stages were jammed with GOP hopefuls.

Since Trump prevailed over his 16 competitors, almost all of them more experienced in politics than he is, the talk has been of a pivot, a reset, a reboot, a restart that would make him project a more presidential demeanor. Although candidates often try to slide a bit back to the political center after primary campaigns dominated by partisans of the right or left, they don’t suddenly become different people, with different personas.

Both candidates have wellknown vulnerabilities on that measure. Trump has been full of bluster and bombast — deriding a Gold Star family, questioning the ability of a judge of Mexican heritage to be fair, ridiculing a disabled journalist.

Clinton has become enmeshed in self- inflicted controversies over her decision to exclusively use a private email server as secretary of State and her failure to avoid the appearance of conflicts of interest involving donations to the Clinton Foundation from foreign governments and interests.

What will be decisive in this campaign isn’t a well- delivered speech on a teleprompter or a carefully calibrated position. It will be a fundamental assessment about the wisdom and character of a prospective president.

Do we trust this person to handle the crisis that neither the candidate nor the voter knows is ahead?

The length and scrutiny of campaigns give voters a glimpse into qualities that matter most in the leader they’ll entrust with their country.

EVAN VUCCI, AP Donald Trump, speaking at a rally in Altoona, Pa., has reset his campaign with the addition of new advisers.