No doubt about it – it’s been a long, hard slog. At times, Election 2024 seemed interminable, and the saturation point for many Americans happened a while ago. Instead of the Breeders’ Cup Sprint, it felt more like the Belmont Stakes, but finally – yes, finally – the nation heads into those last furlongs with the checkered flag in sight. As the presidential candidates zero in on their all-important final messages, their closing arguments say a lot about the candidate and the state of the race.

Kamala Harris: Closing with Fascism & Fear

It appears that the campaign of hope and joy has transformed itself into the age-old trope of calling its Republican opponent a fascist. Kamala Harris and her surrogates, like Hillary Clinton, are working from the same playbook. Their message is clear: Mr. Trump is a threat to Democracy, a fascist, and his rally at Madison Square Garden tonight is a throwback to a past MSG event. “Trump [is] actually reenacting the [Nazi] Madison Square Garden rally in 1939,” Clinton asserted to CNN’s Kaitlin Collins this week.

The purpose of this approach is obvious: Harris is running against Trump, Trumpism, MAGA, and MAGA people – and if these folks scare you – you can and you must vote for her. Joy has given way to fascism and fear. The Washington Examiner pointed out, “Democrats have been falsely calling the Republican nominee a fascist” for the last 60 years. Goldwater, Nixon, Ford, Reagan – you name it – and one after another has been accused of being fascist. So why should things be any different for Mr. Trump? This closing argument is not exactly what Michelle Obama meant when she pitched the notion in 2016 that “When they go low, we go high.”

Trump’s Final Salvo

Often accused by the opposing party as the dystopian candidate of doom and gloom, it appears former President Donald Trump is having the time of his life. From slinging fries at Mickey D’s to having a whale of a time at each campaign event, Orange Man Bad is having a blast. As LNN Editor-in-Chief Mark Angelides recently wrote, “[T]rump seems to have understood something about Kamala Harris’ campaign that she and her team do not: It is not enough to talk about “joy” if you do not demonstrate it.”

Mr. Trump knows this will be the final campaign of his life, and he has seemingly decided to enjoy every second of it. His final message appears to be: Call me what you will, but I’m in your corner, so let’s get to it and, along the way, have a good time.

Melania Makes a Profound Closing Statement

Earlier this month, Melania Trump ended nearly two years of self-imposed silence and spoke to the media. The subject was ostensibly the launch of her book simply titled Melania. She asserted in a video on the X platform that her memoir was written to set the record straight. “As a private person who has often been the subject of public scrutiny and misrepresentation, I feel a responsibility to clarify the facts.” However, a funny thing happened on the way to bringing clarity to her personal experiences as a model, mother, first lady, and wife of Donald Trump.

In her quiet and non-threatening way, Melania made a powerful and profound closing statement regarding the presidential election. It could easily have been missed for its simplicity, but it made a compelling point. She said the “American people need to decide what they really want.” The lady has a point. We, the people, have a clear choice between two very different Americas, and we need to decide what we really want. Often, it is easier to determine what we don’t want than what we actually desire. In either case, this is the central question in the final countdown to election day.

I Know Thee Well Enough

To answer this crucial question, the electorate must know Trump and Harris, what they stand for, and how they plan to govern. Then, the voter can determine which candidate is closest to their vision for America.

At this point, this information is not difficult to come by:  President Donald Trump and Vice-President Kamala Harris are known quantities. Trump may be more easily recognized since he previously served as president, but Ms. Harris has a lengthy public track record as well. She is neither new to the political scene nor a mysterious figure with concealed opinions.

As a senator, her voting record revealed someone who adhered to a very progressive ideology. As a vice president, she did not distinguish herself as a power player, an ideologue, or a particularly influential person. Then again, those who have held the position of VP have more often than not fallen into a similar abyss.

Since becoming the Democratic Party’s candidate for president, Harris has presented as increasingly abstruse and sometimes downright verbally incomprehensible. She also has a propensity for changing positions on policy matters and often appropriates her rivals’ ideas regarding issues, e.g., no tax on tips. One could make the case that Ms. Harris is enigmatic, but few people would say she is not known to the American people.

As for former President Donald Trump, the argument could be made that he is perhaps too well known and never lets a thought go unuttered. But then again, it carries a certain allure that Trump supporters appreciate. His straight talk has possibly offended many, but it has also charmed millions. His appeal, or lack thereof, has, shall we say, sharpened over time and had a polarizing effect on the electorate, but it has also brought forth legions of Americans who believe one thing about Mr. Trump – that he will make their life better. And that, after all, is what it’s really all about. One thing is for sure: America knows Donald Trump.

One Final Closing Message

The two presidential candidates have made their governing methods clear to Americans. One is a doer, and the other a theorizer. This is likely a result of different life experiences. Trump has spent the entirety of his adult existence building, developing, and creating. His trajectory of success has led him toward rather than away from action.

In contrast, Harris’s career in public service as a district attorney, attorney general, US senator, and vice president has led her to think in collaborative terms. In answer to a direct “How would you” question, Harris often says the issue must be studied, or a panel should review it, or a “conversation” must be had.

As a theorizer, Harris prefers to consult, postulate, and only then move into action. She needs input and perhaps even consensus – he does not. While Mr. Trump will listen to wise counsel, his decisions are not based on other’s opinions but instead come from his own learned business experiences. Thus, both candidates view leadership from two very different paradigms. It’s not that one method of leadership is necessarily better than the other, but rather, each method appeals to a distinct segment of the electorate.

For example, who would you most want in charge of a hurricane cleanup effort? It would likely be the doer rather than the theorizer. If inflation is your issue, you’d want action taken as soon as possible to bring it down; you would not want to form an “Inflation Commission” to study it. Once again, the choice regarding each candidate’s governing methodology is straightforward.

As we enter the vortex of the last full week of electioneering, there is likely to be much noise, signifying little (to paraphrase a famous English author). When Melania Trump issued her simple yet profound message to the American people to decide what they really want in a president, it was a clarion call for voters to act upon what they already know: These two people bring distinct governing styles determined by different personal experiences which result in two unique and dissimilar visions for America. The Christian website NeverThirsty put it succinctly: “In the United States of America, we have the privilege and responsibility to express our disagreement or approval of our government by voting.”

Yet we must be aware that as citizens of this republic, we can only control so much. Each American has but one vote, and while the Electoral College does assist in evening things out, we are part of a collective that must ultimately submit to the majority. However, if everyone participates in the election, we will at least figure out who we really are and what we really want.