Entertainment or politics? – Old gold and black

Imagine this: Two presidential candidates vying for the most powerful position in the world agree to have a debate. The point? To present their policies on immigration, the economy, healthcare – you know, the things that matter.

One would expect an intense showdown full of substance and perhaps an improvement over the last debate circus between Trump and Biden. We have Kamala Harris, a smart, younger and far more traditional candidate taking Biden’s place. Then you have Donald Trump – a tough, out-of-pocket man and the polar opposite of every president we have seen this century. But just as quickly as the stakes are set, the expectations disappear.

Suddenly we get into a bizarre argument about immigrants in Ohio eating pets, bragging about owning guns, and, my personal favorite, executing babies after birth. Yes, that’s what politics in 2024 has achieved: a mix of surreal entertainment and governance where it’s becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish where one ends and the other begins. And after being in DC for three weeks, I had a front row seat to the madness. It’s hilarious, frustrating and mind-blowing.

I have the honor to be part of it Wake Washington Programlives with 11 other incredibly intelligent and politically diverse people. Everyone’s job is to spread and make politics

our conversations about our working atmosphere. We watched the debate together and I can say with certainty: there was a lot more laughter than was necessary. We even had a bingo card with all the possible outcomes from this debate: Trump questioning Harris’ race, Harris laughing, a mention of the “coconut tree” joke, talking back and forth – the list goes on.

This debate is not the only time we felt that politics was no longer serious; It’s as if politics takes inspiration from SNL skits and not the other way around. Because I work on Capitol Hill, I spend a large portion of my day discussing politics. Although the election is surprisingly not the hottest topic being talked about, both Democrats and Republicans have collectively expressed that this election is becoming a laughing stock. How did we get to this point? Which characters play a role and what contribution do they make?

Let’s talk about Trump. The man doesn’t just do it Do politics, he leads It. The real secret to Trump’s success? His ability to turn political rallies, interviews and even debates into must-see television. He’s still the same brash, unpredictable figure who made reality TV gold, and he brings the same energy to the political stage. In this debate, he lent his populist persona with the flair of a seasoned entertainer. One moment he’s railing against “political correctness” and liberal elites, and the next he’s making absurd claims about, yes, immigrants eating cats in Ohio.

The fascinating thing about Trump’s performance is that it works for his base. They don’t see his wild escapades and fiery rhetoric as faux pas – they see them as part of his charm, as proof that he’s the only one who wants to say what’s really on their mind. He’s the anti-politician, the guy who will take on the “swamp” and restore America to its former glory. It’s a vision rooted in nostalgia, for a time when American identity felt simpler — at least for some.

For all his critics who see him as chaotic and divisive, his supporters view him as a folk hero fighting against the forces they believe are tearing the country apart. For them, the mix of entertainment and politics is not a problem – it is a function that they try to imitate. Political activist David Bossie’s conversation with our Wake Washington cohort highlighted the blurred line between entertainment and politics in the Trump era. He proudly discussed creating “pro-Trump documentaries,” a form of political messaging that serves entertainment and grassroots mobilization rather than balanced discourse.

His account of Trump’s political strategy – “Never answer the questions he’s asked, he’ll squash them” – highlighted how entertainment tactics such as distraction and spectacle were central to Trump’s political success. The breathtaking moments, like the infamous one from Bossie Commentary on a Black Fox News reportershow how much shock value, rather than politics, shaped their approach.

Trump has turned politics into a form of entertainment in which politics takes a backseat to personality and spectacle. His debates seem less like forums for discussing ideas and more like performances designed to get people talking. It’s politics as reality TV, where the goal is not to convince with facts but to captivate the audience – no matter how wild the content may be.

Harris, on the other hand, represents the exact opposite. She is here to discuss the current issues and move the country forward. Their vision is progress, inclusivity and justice. But in a world where politics is so intertwined with entertainment, can someone like Harris cut through the noise? Can substance triumph over spectacle?

Harris deftly balances politics and entertainment, using humor and personal anecdotes to connect with the public while maintaining her role as a serious politician. Her “coconut tree” joke at a fundraiser in Florida, symbolizing resilience, is an example of how she entertained audiences while conveying a political message.

Despite these entertaining moments, Harris remains rooted in traditional politics. She rose to prominence as a prosecutor, California attorney general and U.S. senator, emphasizing law and order. As vice president, she handles normal diplomatic duties and bipartisan efforts, balancing media-savvy moments with serious policy work. Harris’ ability to entertain while remaining anchored in institutional politics reflects the evolving nature of modern leadership – where a politician needs both familiarity and credibility to succeed. But it’s a fair question to ask: Is this enough?

We saw Hillary Clinton win the popular vote through a traditional campaign, but ultimately Trump won. It was more memorable because it was so outlandish. Harris gets her support from celebrities like Taylor Swift, but she hasn’t relied on media spectacle or entertainment tactics. She has focused on governance, engagement in the standard functions of her office and her strong legal background. What sets her apart is her ability to balance personal narratives with serious policy positions, which ultimately connects her with a range of voters.

This race is not just a battle between two candidates. It was an example of the larger struggle going on in America right now: Do we want our politics to be serious, issue-focused and focused on the future? Or should it be fun, loud and chaotic? For all of us who work in DC, this was equal parts hilarious and infuriating to watch. Sure, Trump’s antics are good for a laugh, but there’s something deeply unsettling about watching the highest office in the land become a sideshow.

At the same time, Harris’s steadfastness offers hope for a future in which politics is once again about politics and progress rather than personality and theatrics. So what kind of country do we want to be? Are we here for the show or for the solutions? This is not just a question for voters – it is a question for the soul of American democracy. In 2024 we will not just elect a president. We decide what kind of politics we want – and whether it should be entertainment or something far more important.