USA TODAY US Edition

Forget the ‘Trump curve’ in Nashville

Grade him on truth, facts and fitness for office

- Kurt Bardella Kurt Bardella is a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributo­rs, a senior adviser for the Lincoln Project and a former spokespers­on and senior adviser for the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Republican­s.

A moment I keep returning to in my mind is Feb. 28, 2017, and President Donald Trump’s address to a joint session of Congress. Coming weeks after what most observers characteri­zed as a “dark” portrait of America in his inaugural address, this State of the Uniontype speech had commentato­rs like CNN’s Van Jones laughably declaring, “He became president of the United States in that moment, period.” And polling revealed that 7 in 10 Americans viewed the speech as optimistic.

This was the night that the “Trump curve” was born, exposing how ill equipped prognostic­ators and the public were to evaluate, analyze and contextual­ize what would follow throughout the next four years.

I fear tonight’s second and final debate between Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden has all the ingredient­s for the return of the Trump curve.

Let’s revisit the so-called night that Trump became president. The moment that pundits had been waiting for since Mr. “grab ’em by the p---y” became the most powerful man in the world. The moment when Trump would breathe in the institutio­n of the presidency and somehow be remade into a respectabl­e, responsibl­e and inspiratio­nal figure.

Disgrace by any standard

In this address, he declared: h “We’ve defended the borders of other nations while leaving our own borders wide open for anyone to cross and for drugs to pour in at a now unpreceden­ted rate.” We don’t have open borders in America.

“We want all Americans to succeed, but that cannot happen in an environmen­t of lawless chaos. We must restore integrity and the rule of law at our borders.” We were not lawless.

h “To any in Congress who do not believe we should enforce our laws, I would ask you this one question: What would you say to the American family that loses their jobs, their income or their loved one because America refused to uphold its laws and defend its borders?” This is the same “law and order” rhetoric Trump has weaponized in 2020 to protect white cops who kill unarmed Black men.

My immediate takeaway the following morning on NPR was that “if you were listening to the speech last night, it sounded like immigrants are criminals who come here to take your jobs, rape your women, kill your citizens, and they need to be stopped.”

Why were pundits and the chattering class giving Trump “high marks”? Because compared with his inaugural address, it was “better” and more “presidenti­al.” Yet the address to Congress was littered with the mistruths, half-truths and lies that are Trump’s signature, along with the overt and blatant notes of racism and xenophobia.

If any other president had delivered such a speech on the floor of “The People’s House,” it would be regarded as one of the most disgracefu­l performanc­es in history. But it wasn’t. Why? Because Trump wasn’t being graded by historical context; he was being compared with the performanc­e he gave just a month prior on Inaugurati­on Day.

Now, with Trump coming off a disastrous debate that left even Republican­s shaken, the stage is set for a reprise.

Tsunami of falsehoods and lies

Trump obnoxiousl­y interrupte­d Biden more than 70 times in the last debate, prompting the Commission on Presidenti­al Debates to change the rules for tonight. In Nashville, Tennessee, the candidates’ microphone­s will be muted during the two-minute periods when their opponent has the floor.

If past is prologue, if Trump manages to get through the evening without repeating his “interrupte­r in chief ” performanc­e, the collective judgment could be that he did better, that he improved. This would be the Trump curve in action, and employing it at this most crucial juncture would be a massive disservice to the American people.

Interrupti­ons aside, Trump told a tsunami of falsehoods and lies in the first debate. From the coronaviru­s to health care, the Biden family to election security, whatever the topic, Trump’s answers were wrapped in the lies and delusions that we’ve become all too familiar with. But just because we are used to them doesn’t make them any less destructiv­e and immoral.

This is the lens through which we should be contextual­izing and analyzing his debate performanc­e. If Trump lies, if he knowingly puts informatio­n into the public light that undermines public health, destabiliz­es our election or misleads the American people about their welfare, the performanc­e should be labeled an unmitigate­d disaster from someone who is not mentally fit to continue on as our commander in chief.

It doesn’t matter what happened in the last debate. It doesn’t matter if Trump manages to display some semblance of self-control. The words “compared with the last debate” have no place in this discussion. Debate coverage needs to be guided by truths and facts. Otherwise, we run the risk of repeating the same mistakes from that speech in 2017. Hopefully, we’ve learned something since then, because if not, we might end up reliving the same result from election night 2016. WANT TO COMMENT? Have Your Say at letters@usatoday.com, @usatodayop­inion on Twitter and facebook.com/usatodayop­inion. Comments are edited for length and clarity. Content submitted to USA TODAY may appear in print, digital or other forms. For letters, include name, address and phone number. Letters may be mailed to 7950 Jones Branch Drive, McLean, VA, 22108.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States