Behold, an issue

Campaign promises are rarely fulfilled

What are “the issues” in the 2020 presidential race? Are Americans really going to vote for open borders? Or the end of private health insurance? Or a free college education for anyone who wants one ?

And if Americans did vote for a candidate committed to those things and that candidate became president, would he or she seriously pursue them?

If Bernie Sanders becomes presidentwill free college become a reality? It seems unlikely, doesn’t it?

It is a peculiarity of American presidential politics that the “issue” a future president runs on is generally not a literal promise or contract, but an indication of direction.

Dwight Eisenhower ran on the promise that he would “go to Korea.” John F. Kennedy on the “missile gap” and the promise to “do better.” Barack Obama on hope and change.

The issues in the campaign have little to do with what the president actually does — usually.

Franklin Roosevelt promised not to be Herbert Hoover. He did not yet know how. But he knew “fear itself” was the enemy.

The exception is Donald Trump, who regarded his own rhetoric as a business contract: He would crack down on illegal immigration, appoint originalist judges and goose the economy, especially the industrial economy.

He was sure most of the country wanted a president who would “do something” about his first and third issues, and he was right about that with enough voters in enough states.

Maybe the Democrats should take a page from the Trump playbook. Instead of embracing issues that are a signal of direction (or of virtue), maybe they should pick one or two issues that actually connect with people. Maybe they should pick an issue in which change is actually possible.

One possibility: decency and civility.

For this you don’t even need to pass legislation. You only need to behave in ways that would make your mom or kids proud.

It would mean that protesters who, for example, harass Sen. Mitch McConnell in his home and threaten him with bodily harm are shunned by others who share their disdain for Mr. McConnell’s politics. It might mean they are arrested. Left and right would both have to give up selfindulgent rage.

What if a candidate committed to that?

Another possibility: Domestic security. Making kids safe in their schools. Taking weapons of war out of the hands of the mentally ill.

This is not really the old “gun control issue.” It is more like “fear itself.”

The fundamental responsibility of the government, at all levels, is to protect citizens. That’s why we have speed limits, seat belts, a standing army, and regulated food and drug industries.

Citizens need to be safe from gunfire at town meetings with members of Congress, in theaters, at concerts, on campus, in restaurants and bars. Children need to be secure in their schools. That is the duty of government.

This means expensive security systems and personnel in every school.

We did it for airports. Democrats, behold your issue. Americans will likely not vote for this shade of socialism or that, even if the signal is symbolic. But they will vote for public safety and protecting kids.

As for Mr. Trump, he has been presented with a Nixon in China moment, if he chooses to take it. He is the least ideological president since Ike, but he has the most unshakable political base since Andrew Jackson. He could “do something” about guns, pay no political price, again show independent voters that he’s a doer and save a lot of lives.