Swift Endorses Harris, Trump Endorses Being a Complete Fuckwit
The Presidential Debate, wrapped.
Kamala Harris met Donald Trump for the first time today.
That fact is quite staggering.
Watching each candidate spend so much time campaigning against the fundamentals of each others’ belief system, it was striking to see Harris walk across the stage into Trump’s territory, hold out her hand and say:
“Kamala Harris.”
I’m not sure he would have engaged with her of his own accord, or even met Harris at the halfway point onstage.
I don’t believe at any point during the debate that Donald Trump said Kamala Harris’ name. Trump reduced the Vice President to ‘her’ and ‘she’ exclusively for the more than 90 minutes that they stood behind their respective lecterns. His refusal to look at Harris or acknowledge her speaks volumes, but we don’t need more evidence of his character.
I watched the entire debate. What I anticipated was that the goals of Team Harris would be to push forward ‘the personal’ of who Kamala Harris is (Americans don’t know enough about her history, career and personality), poke the bear that is Donald Trump until he cracked (rally sizes brought the leaning tower of Orange down swiftly), and to speak to an expansive future: the opportunity economy, freedom from the chaos of Trump, empowering middle class Americans and small business owners.
I must emphasise: I am not a Kamala Harris fan.
Politicians are not celebrities. They are not to be cult-followed or idolised. I disagree with Harris and most politicians I have ever spoken about and to on many issues. But, if I were a United States citizen I would put a ‘1’ next to her name. Why? Under a system which doesn’t have preferential voting - I don’t believe there is the possibility that an independent stands a chance. It isn’t like voting for The Greens in Australia - the two party system continues to rule there.
I believe in keeping Donald Trump out, I also believe in abolishing the current system. Those beliefs exist at once. I believe Kamala Harris is weaponising the genocide in Gaza and is complicit in war crimes. I also believe she is the only viable candidate who has called for and will continue to work toward a ceasefire. Lobby, protest and pressure the person capable of listening and changing. That will continue to be my view and if yours is different, I respect that. As I’ve seen people like Liz Plank say, I believe this one is too important to sit out. I understand why many people will, though. As someone who cannot even vote, it is difficult to have these conversations outside the arena. The stakes are distressingly high.
Returning to the debate, it went as predicted by anyone who has ever been capable of a critical thought.
Trump was distressed, flustered and easily activated. His raw nerve was easily located when Harris said:
“I'm going to actually do something really unusual, and I'm going to invite you to attend one of Donald Trump's rallies, because it's a really interesting thing to watch…People start leaving his rallies early out of exhaustion and boredom.”
Gotcha.
He lost his shit. What I thought started out as quite a tightly trained Trump (I can only compare him to other versions of himself, not the political spectrum) immediately transformed into a petulant child for the remainder of the debate.
Harris was visibly nervous at first and worked into a strong voice within the first ten minutes of debate. She did avoid answering questions in the pursuit of storytelling and broad, general statements which landed flat with me a few times. It was easy to understand her brief: tell people who I am and distance myself from Biden. While Harris failed to answer questions directly, she articulated her position and critiqued Trump factually. I can’t say the same of Trump.
Kamala’s best statements were around reproductive rights, economic policy and contrasting her articulation and skillset against Trump’s: a prosecutor and a felon. She had a few zingers.
Trump, on the other hand, accused VP pick Tim Walz of supporting abortions at nine months and the execution of babies, claimed that immigrants were stealing pets to eat in Ohio and stated that Kamala Harris wants to perform “transgender operations on illegal aliens who are in prison". It was disturbing. He is not fit and proper to hold the position.
Disinformation was rife, and the moderators stepped in to fact-check Trump. Twitter went mad calling the debate a 3-vs-1 attack. Brainwashed is an understatement.
At the conclusion of the debate, when I was unsure if my eyes would ever recover from what I had just witnessed, I opened Instagram to discover Taylor Swift had endorsed Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. Swift addressed her concerns around artificial intelligence and encouraged voters to do their research and register. A basic message that was to be expected from arguably the world’s most famous person.
As a Taylor Swift fan who harbours a lot of criticism for her, I’m pleased but left wanting more. Yes, I would like this person to wield her power and influence more often, in more nuanced ways and for more issues that don’t directly reference her experience. Am I glad she finally said something after facing months (if not years) of mounting pressure? Of course.
I don’t want to see or demand unchecked, uneducated political talk from uninformed celebrities. I don’t demand an activist post quota - but I would like to see consistency from those who have monetised feminism and specifically the LGBTQIA+ community for their own gain. If I was in her position, I would feel an immeasurable weight of responsibility to always be advocating for and using my influence for better. I know Swift is capable of it, she chooses not to for her own monetary benefit (selling more tickets to more people). There are also safety risks to Swift and her fans to consider. My expectation that she advocates regularly leaves me feeling constantly deflated when she fails to act, is this fair?
Personally, as someone who produces much of my political content for free, I often feel people are never happy and constantly demand that I post what they want, when they want, how they want and exactly in line with what they think (and therefore I must think it too). When I don’t, I am unfollowed (this is fine!), criticised (good! I should be!), berated (an accepted part of my job!) or worse, have my safety and my family threatened (why I sometimes take breaks!). So while I expect more from Taylor Swift, where does that expectation stop? What would be deemed ‘enough’?
Yesterday on my discussion post I asked if we can have friends on ‘the other side’ of politics. This referred to the backlash Swift was facing related to her public friendship with Brittany Mahomes (both of their partners play for the Kansas City Chiefs - so there is a public-facing colleague element to their friendship, which is an important note in my book). Every comment left on that discussion from each of you resonated with me. I thought they were exceptional pieces to think on - thank you.
I don’t want to be close friends with people who hold bigoted views. But I don’t cut off people in my life who disagree with me. These are two different statements along a spectrum but both must be noted. As a white woman with a heap of privilege, I’d rather talk to my dad eighty-seven times about an offensive comment than block him and leave him unchallenged. That leads to those views being spouted to colleagues, friends and people in his sphere who are marginalised. I want to educate him and do that work with the hope of preventing offensive rhetoric spreading. Would I be best friends with someone who votes for Trump or Dutton? No. Do I believe in talking to those people regularly about politics at group events and when I encounter them if they are willing to converse with me? Yes.
Social media is filled with sweeping statements, but this requires compendiums of consideration. I’m not saying you have to subject yourselves to these conversations, but I’m saying I will over and over again - for the rest of my life. It is my approach to change making. I don’t want to spend my life screaming into the echo chamber. I want to move the needle for people who have never had someone give them space to be wrong. I grew up in a conservative town and was taught about feminism by many people who took the time with me. For that I am so thankful. I want to continually try to use that privilege to help others understand left-wing viewpoints and values now too.
Did Taylor Swift endorse Kamala Harris to save herself from the criticism of her silence? I’d say so.
Is it still a good thing that she did post her endorsement? Yes.
Will the internet pressure male celebrities to do the same? Doubt it.
Is social media capable of having conversations about all of these topics? Absolutely not.
Should we still try? Yes.
H.
Please leave a comment below with your thoughts!
(aaaaand here are tickets for the Cheek tour if you haven’t grabbed them yet).
"I don’t want to be close friends with people who hold bigoted views. But I don’t cut off people in my life who disagree with me. These are two different statements along a spectrum but both must be noted." Thank you for perfectly summarising what I have been trying to explain to those around me for while now. I have often felt when I have expressed a disinterest in being friends with someone whose views I don't agree with, that I am met with comments to suggest I am narrow minded and need to loosen up.
I've also read many of the comments on your posts since you posted about endorsing Harris. It has blown my mind that people expect you to only ever support the exact same view that they hold, and have tried to tear you down for this. I feel like this is a perfect response 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
I completely agree with you on the Harris / Gaza issue. Her responses to questions on the issue leave me unconvinced that she is working 'around the clock' with the Biden administration to secure a ceasefire deal. That would surely be impossible with her current campaign demands. However, I struggle to imagine what fully honest response she can give at this point that won't adversely affect her chances of winning the election, or be seen as a criticism of Biden. Her current job literally requires her to support and promote Biden’s policies, whilst her election campaign requires her to delicately balance her own proposed policies in such a way as to be palatable to as many voters as possible. That Trump should get back into office is absolutely unthinkable, and he would absolutely not give a shit about Palestinian children getting bombed.