There’s no doubt about it: Governor Gary Johnson asking “What is Aleppo?” during a national television interview was an atrocious, humiliating mistake for him to make.
I’m a libertarian. I know Gary Johnson; I like him, and yet even I had to criticize him for it, so I wasn’t surprised to see so much of the media being critical, too. After all, it was a really bad gaffe, so I thought that all the criticism was fair.
At least at first I did.
Eventually, all of the piling on started to seem like a bit much, particularly when I started seeing so many people say that Johnson’s comment was “disqualifying.”
At a point, I thought to myself, “Wait, didn’t Donald Trump not know what Brexit was?”
Now, in case you’ve forgotten about this exchange, let me refresh your memory. It was during an interview with Michael Wolff of The Hollywood Reporter earlier this summer, and it went like this:
Wolff: “And Brexit? Your position?”
Trump: “Huh?”
Wolff: “Brexit.”
Trump: “Hmm.”
Wolff: “The Brits leaving the EU.”
Brexit was dominating the headlines all around the world, and yet Trump could only answer a question about it after being told what it even was.
Of course, Trump used verbal pauses to avoid the question until Wolff helped him out, while Johnson outright admitted that he was totally confused — which is something that any media trainer would tell you not to do. Trump handled it better, but it should still be clear to any intelligent observer that he was equally as stumped. The difference between these two situations one of TV-interviewing skills and not one of current-events knowledge.
What’s more, Trump’s Brexit flub was far from the only time he’s displayed a lack of awareness about what’s going on around the world. Last year, when Hugh Hewitt asked him about the leaders of ISIS, he quite clearly knew next to nothing about any of it. When Hewitt asked him about the Quds, Trump got them confused with the Kurds, later claiming, of course, to have “misheard.”
Trump’s Brexit flub was far from the only time he’s displayed a lack of awareness about what’s going on around the world.
Now many people — myself included — have said the reason that Johnson’s mistake was so bad is because Aleppo is mentioned in almost every article about the Syrian crisis, and therefore, not recognizing it makes it look as though you aren’t very familiar with the issue. But here’s the thing: Just as it’s hard to read about Syria without hearing about Aleppo, it’s also hard to read about it without hearing about ISIS’s leadership or the Quds force. Trump’s supporters don’t seem to think this means he knows nothing about ISIS, and they don’t think it’s disqualifying.
While we’re at it, let’s have a look at Hillary Clinton, the captain of team “I Don’t Know.” She and her supporters replied “I don’t know” a whopping 327 times during her e-mail investigation. Let’s assume, for a moment, that what her supporters have been saying about this is true: That she really was telling the truth about her e-mails. That would mean that she, as the Secretary of State — a job that centers around handling confidential, classified information — didn’t know the proper markings for confidential, classified information. It would mean that she also didn’t know that discussions about potential drone strikes — that is, possible military operations — would be sensitive information.
Now, personally, I don’t believe for a second that Hillary Clinton didn’t know these things. But many of her supporters do believe it, and some of them are the same people calling Gary Johnson’s “I don’t know” moment unforgivable. Do they not realize that, when they say Johnson’s comment makes him disqualified, they’re in effect saying she is disqualified, too? And remember, the stakes in her situation were much, much higher than those of a television appearance.
It’s a fact: Flubs, even egregious ones, happen all the time. Remember how, in 2008, Barack Obama talked about having visited 57 states during his campaign? Was that disqualifying? Well, seeing as he’s now the president, I’m going to say no.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to say there’s any excuse for a presidential candidate not recognizing “Aleppo.” I couldn’t defend it yesterday, I’m not defending it now, and even Johnson himself has admitted that there’s “no excuse”– which, you have to admit, shows a kind of humility that’s refreshing to see in politics.
#related#I’m also not telling you which candidate to support. Personally, I have not and will not formally endorse anyone in this race. I’m not saying who I’m voting for, or even whether I’ll be voting at all. That’s not what this is about. This is about logical consistency.
It’s one thing to say you think that Johnson is, overall, unqualified, and to support Trump or Clinton instead. But if you’re saying that it’s his Aleppo flub in itself that disqualifies him? Well, in that case, you logically can’t support either of the other two — because the standard you yourself have set would disqualify your preferred candidate as well. It’s one thing to acknowledge a bad moment; but to make it the news of the day? To consider it a “disqualifying moment,” given the gaffes and records of the two major candidates? Johnson’s gaffe was bad, sure, but you cannot look at the big picture and think the response to it was fair.