Combining democracy and mass culture, the format is archetypally American, yet has proved to be highly exportable. Even more people likely watch their own pre-election debates abroad— including, with encouragement from America’s non-partisan Commission on Presidential Debates, in fledgling African and Eastern European democracies—than tune in to America’s. These are not trivial accomplishments. Setting aside many moments of dullness and inanity, the four-yearly televised event is an enactment of American democracy and an advertisement for it of which Americans should be proud. But they can forget that for now.
總統(tǒng)電視辯論的形式結(jié)合了民主與大眾文化，是典型的美國形式，然而事實證明，它具有很高的可輸出性。甚至有更多的海外人口想觀看自己國家的選前辯論。包括非洲和東歐民主國家也新采用了這一形式，盡管美國無黨派總統(tǒng)辯論委員會鼓勵海外人口觀看美國辯論，但他們也還是想看自己國家的，不想看美國的。這些輸出算得上是不平凡的成就了。拋開許多沉悶和無聊的時刻，這個四年一次的總統(tǒng)電視辯論活動是美國民主的一次宣示和廣告，美國人應(yīng)該引以為豪。但現(xiàn)在，他們可以忘記這一點了。
Debating Hillary Clinton in 2016, Mr Trump strained the rules to the limit; he interrupted and physically intimidated his opponent (and promised to jail her). In Cleveland he largely ignored them. He interrupted, contradicted and traduced Joe Biden, and sometimes also the moderator, Chris Wallace of Fox News. He cavilled and scowled; he huffed and he ranted. The ferocity of his claimed grievances was formidable. It was also ludicrous. It might once even have seemed comical, were he not America’s president.
在2016年與希拉里·克林頓的辯論中，特朗普就已經(jīng)逼近了規(guī)則的底線。他打斷希拉里講話、進(jìn)行人身威脅（并承諾要將她關(guān)進(jìn)監(jiān)獄）。而這次在克利夫蘭，特朗普更是無視規(guī)則。他對喬·拜登進(jìn)行打斷、反駁和詆毀，甚至有時也會打斷主持人。他事事挑剔、皺著眉頭、怒不可遏、冷嘲熱諷。他的滿腹牢騷和兇狠至極讓人害怕。也同樣很可笑。如果他不是美國總統(tǒng)，這可能一度看起來很滑稽。
His criticisms of his Democratic rival were familiar, mostly or wholly inaccurate, and often contradictory. He accused Mr Biden of being so tough on crime that he had alienated African-Americans and so weak on it that he refused even to utter the phrase “l(fā)aw and order”. He accused him of being so enslaved to the left that he was pushing the left-wing policies, such as Medicare for All and the Green New Deal, that belonged to the Democratic rivals he trounced in his party’s primaries. When Mr Biden pushed back, Mr Trump crowed that he had “just lost the left”.
特朗普對民主黨對手的批評都是耳熟能詳?shù)模蠖嗷蛲耆遣徽_的，而且常常自相矛盾。在犯罪問題上，他一會批評拜登過于強硬，以至于疏遠(yuǎn)了非洲裔美國人；一會又說拜登過于軟弱，以至拒絕說出“法律和秩序”這一短語。特朗普指責(zé)拜登對左翼卑躬屈膝，極力推行一系列左翼政策，比如全民醫(yī)保政策和綠色新政，這些政策都是黨內(nèi)初選時拜登痛擊的民主黨對手所推行的。當(dāng)拜登反擊時，特朗普又得意地高呼“拜登失去了左翼的支持”。
But many of his attacks were more personal. He suggested Mr Biden was unintelligent and levelled unsubstantiated corruption allegations at his surviving son. At times Mr Biden responded in intemperate kind—he called the president a racist, a liar, a clown and enjoined him: “Will you shut up, man?” But this was not a two-way fight. Mr Biden’s rehearsed chuckling forbearance was more striking in the moment than his insults. And Mr Wallace’s increasingly desperate remonstrations were almost exclusively aimed at the president.
但特朗普的許多攻擊是針對個人的。他暗示拜登智商低，并對拜登健在的兒子進(jìn)行未經(jīng)證實的腐敗指控。有時，拜登也會反映過激，他稱特朗普總統(tǒng)是種族主義者、騙子、小丑，并責(zé)令：“你能閉嘴嗎，老兄？”但總統(tǒng)辯論并不是一場對罵的斗爭。此時此刻，拜登表現(xiàn)出的輕笑隱忍遠(yuǎn)比辱罵回應(yīng)更令人印象深刻。而主持人華萊士也愈加忍無可忍，他提出的批評幾乎是完全針對特朗普總統(tǒng)的。
譯文由可可原創(chuàng)，僅供學(xué)習(xí)交流使用，未經(jīng)許可請勿轉(zhuǎn)載。
評論
打印
