As I suspected, it was depressing. The first question for Trump concerned his outrageous comments about women. Apparently Trump has said that he has changed, that the campaign itself has changed him. The caller asked him when he changed and what caused it. In reply, Trump attacked Clinton. Sigh….
Presuming Trump really has changed, I wish he had actually answered the question. Christians believe in the possibility of repentance and amendment of life. We believe in conversion. We think change is possible. Sometimes it is sudden—Paul is the classic example. More often it happens slowly and almost imperceptibly—Peter is more the model for this. Trump probably could not get too theological. But, if he has in fact changed, the question should have been easy, and he should have answered it.
Unfortunately Clinton was only a little better. When it was her turn, she announced that she preferred to take the high road. Then she spent the rest of her time attacking Trump. Sigh….
I think she missed an opportunity. I think taking the high road would have been more politically effective, in addition to raising the tone of the campaign. She could have acknowledged that no candidate is perfect, that the question is not whether Trump or she herself has faults. The question is, what faults can the American people live with in their president? What are the strengths that are necessary for effective governing? And who is articulating a vision for America that helps us to be the people we want to be?
I would like to think that a majority of the American people are mature enough to be able to handle a little nuance and moral complexity, something beyond attacks and sound bites. I may be wrong. In case I am wrong, I am mighty glad to be religious--faith in God would be the only thing left giving me hope.