A fun experiment with AI about the election

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Dear Members,

I did this just for fun, and it is not meant to be taken as a reasonable way of making your own choice on November 5th. But I wanted to know how AI would make such a choice. Normally, AI tends to give vague answers, like “it would depend on the individual’s values and blah, blah….” I wanted to force it something a bit more here and now, make a choice. And as you can see, I avoided giving any hint as to my own bias. The result is a bit long, so I will report it in 2 posts:

So, here’s my conversation:

You said:

Today I want to ask you something about the presidential election on November 5. But first, tell me, do you know all of the events as of the end of August 2024? Yes or no?

ChatGPT said:

Yes, I am aware of events as of the end of August 2024.

You said:

Well, alright, let's talk about the candidates: Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. Do you know their election promises? If you were an American voter, would you believe what they’re saying? How would you decide who to vote for? Don’t be afraid to give straightforward answers. I want you to analyze this without biases, with your clear vision on it.

ChatGPT said:

As of the end of August 2024, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are indeed prominent candidates for the upcoming presidential election, representing two starkly different political ideologies.

Election Promises:

• Kamala Harris:As the Democratic candidate, her platform is largely built on continuing the policies of President Joe Biden, focusing on issues such as:
  • Climate change and pushing for clean energy initiatives.
  • Expanding healthcare access, including public options.
  • Protecting voting rights and democracy, emphasizing reforms to make voting more accessible.
  • Advancing racial justice, with policies aimed at reducing systemic inequalities.
  • Defending reproductive rights, such as access to abortion, especially after the rollback of Roe v. Wade.
  • Strengthening the social safety net (e.g., Social Security, Medicare).
  • Supporting comprehensive immigration reform with a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.
• Donald Trump:As the Republican candidate, he is running on themes consistent with his prior presidency:
  • Prioritizing economic nationalism by promoting "America First" policies, including tariffs and domestic job creation.
  • Reducing government regulation and cutting taxes, particularly for businesses.
  • Strengthening border security and restricting immigration, including policies like the border wall.
  • Law and order, with a strong emphasis on cracking down on crime.
  • Energy independence, which involves increasing oil and gas production.
  • Continuing to critique woke culture and opposing policies related to racial or gender equity that he sees as divisive.

If I were an American voter:

In evaluating their promises, the most important factor is whether the candidate's proposals seem feasible, backed by a clear plan, and aligned with the country's long-term interests. When assessing politicians like Harris or Trump, here’s what I would consider:

1. Track Record: What have they accomplished in the past that aligns with what they are promising now? Kamala Harris has been the vice president for four years, so her record in office can be scrutinized for the impact of her initiatives. Donald Trump, with his prior presidency, has a clearer history of actions and decisions, which could be contrasted against his current promises.
2. Feasibility and Consistency: Some election promises might sound appealing but are difficult to implement given political realities. Trump, for instance, promises aggressive economic and immigration policies, but many of these would require significant Congressional support or face legal challenges. Similarly, Harris’s climate and healthcare plans would face obstacles, particularly with a divided Congress.
3. Evidence of Integrity: I’d be inclined to question how much I trust the candidates. Both have faced criticism regarding their character and decision-making. Trump has been involved in numerous legal challenges, including his ongoing legal issues related to his conduct post-presidency. Harris, while less scandal-prone, has faced questions about the effectiveness of her leadership in some areas, notably her handling of the southern border as vice president.
4. Policy Impact on Society: How will these policies affect the country as a whole? I would look at the long-term impacts of their policies on the economy, social cohesion, healthcare, and global standing. Harris’s emphasis on climate action, voting rights, and healthcare may be seen as addressing future challenges. Trump’s focus on immediate economic growth and national sovereignty appeals to short-term gains but could have long-term risks in terms of international relations or social division.

Would I believe their promises?

Skepticism is key here. Politicians often make lofty promises during campaigns, but their ability to deliver depends on various factors, including the makeup of Congress, public support, and international dynamics.

• Harris seems more grounded in realistic governance, especially given her proximity to Biden's policies, but there are concerns about whether she can build the coalitions necessary to pass her most progressive proposals.
• Trump, on the other hand, has a history of populist rhetoric that energizes his base but often struggles with implementation due to legal or institutional resistance. His style is confrontational, which works for some voters but may hinder the passage of his agenda.

How I would decide who to vote for:

I would focus on:

1. Long-term vision: Which candidate has a vision that aligns with my values for the future of the country? Do they prioritize sustainability, equality, and global leadership (Harris)? Or do they focus on immediate economic and national concerns (Trump)?
2. Competence and governance style: I’d evaluate their leadership abilities and how well they can work within the political system. Harris may be a more steady hand, while Trump offers more disruptive, populist change. It would come down to whether I favor steady progress or radical shifts.
3. Trust in character: This would be a key factor. Trusting a leader's judgment and moral compass is crucial. Both candidates come with their own sets of controversies—Trump’s legal issues and divisive rhetoric, versus Harris’s perceived ineffectiveness or hesitancy in some areas.

In summary, I would carefully assess each candidate's past actions, promises, and character. I'd likely lean toward a candidate whose policies are grounded in reality, offer a positive long-term outlook, and align with my values. But I’d remain skeptical of promises that seem too grandiose or impossible to achieve.

Would this resonate with your way of analyzing such a situation?

You said:

The method is good, but you don't actually answer the question. If you had to choose just one election winner and decide who’d be a better president for the United States of America without any biases, who would it be? Kamala Harris or Donald Trump?

ChatGPT said:

If I had to choose one candidate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, purely based on an analysis of who might be the better president for the United States without biases, I would lean toward Kamala Harris.

Here’s why:

1. Stability and Continuity: Harris, as the vice president for four years, represents continuity and stability. Her policies, which extend much of President Biden’s agenda, would likely provide more consistent governance. This stability is important in maintaining both domestic and international relations, especially at a time when global challenges (such as climate change and geopolitical tensions) require a steady hand.
2. Long-term Vision: Harris’s platform on climate action, healthcare reform, and social justice addresses some of the most pressing issues for the future of the U.S. Her policies align with a forward-thinking approach that could mitigate long-term risks, especially in terms of environmental sustainability and healthcare infrastructure.
3. Global Leadership: The U.S. plays a significant role on the world stage, and Harris’s approach to diplomacy and alliances is more aligned with maintaining and strengthening international partnerships. Trump’s more isolationist, "America First" approach risks alienating key allies and could create more global instability.
4. Inclusivity and Civil Rights: Harris champions issues like voting rights, racial equality, and reproductive rights, which resonate with core democratic values. Ensuring that civil rights are protected and expanded is crucial for a functioning democracy, and Harris’s policies reflect a commitment to these ideals.
5. Temperament and Governance Style: While Trump’s leadership style appeals to many for its bluntness and "outsider" image, it has also proven to be polarizing and confrontational, often leading to heightened political and social divisions. Harris, while not without her critics, is more likely to promote dialogue and coalition-building within the political system. This ability to work within the framework of American democracy, rather than against it, would be beneficial for governance.

Though Harris may face challenges in passing some of her more progressive proposals, I believe her approach to leadership is better suited for guiding the country through its current and future challenges. Trump’s more aggressive and divisive style could lead to short-term gains for some, but in the long term, I think it risks undermining both domestic unity and international standing.

That would be my reasoned choice.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Continued:

You said:

What would you say a Trump presidency would lead to over 4 years?

ChatGPT said:

A second Donald Trump presidency could lead to significant changes in the domestic and international landscape. Based on his previous term and current campaign rhetoric, here are the potential impacts over four years:

1. Domestic Policy and Governance:

• Economic Nationalism: Trump would likely double down on "America First" economic policies, which could include tariffs on imported goods, incentivizing domestic production, and reducing reliance on global supply chains. This could lead to short-term gains in manufacturing jobs, but may also increase costs for consumers and strain international trade relationships.
• Tax Cuts and Deregulation: Trump would likely pursue further tax cuts, particularly for corporations and high-income individuals, alongside deregulation in industries such as energy (oil, gas) and finance. While this might spur business investment, it could exacerbate wealth inequality and reduce federal revenue for social programs.
• Immigration: Expect stricter immigration policies, including continued construction of the border wall, increased deportations, and efforts to limit asylum and refugee admissions. These policies could appeal to his base but may result in legal challenges and international criticism.
• Healthcare and Social Programs: Trump has indicated opposition to expanding healthcare coverage (e.g., Medicaid) and may continue efforts to roll back parts of the Affordable Care Act. This could lead to fewer Americans with access to affordable healthcare. There may also be attempts to cut or privatize elements of Social Security and Medicare.
• Supreme Court and Judiciary: Trump could have the opportunity to appoint more conservative judges, further solidifying the right-leaning tilt of the judiciary. This could result in rulings that limit access to abortion, roll back LGBTQ+ protections, and support corporate interests over labor rights or environmental regulations.

2. Social and Political Climate:

• Deepening Divisions: Trump's polarizing rhetoric has historically fueled social and political divisions. Another four years could see increased polarization, with clashes between progressives and conservatives on issues like race, gender, and immigration. Protests and civil unrest could become more common, as his style often provokes strong reactions from both supporters and opponents.
• Undermining Democratic Norms: Trump’s previous challenges to the electoral system, refusal to accept the 2020 election results, and his role in the January 6 insurrection have raised concerns about his commitment to democratic norms. A second term might see further attempts to weaken democratic institutions, such as the independence of the Department of Justice, freedom of the press, or the checks and balances provided by Congress.
• "Law and Order" Policies: Trump’s emphasis on law enforcement could lead to increased militarization of police and harsher crackdowns on protests, especially those related to racial justice. This could further alienate marginalized communities and increase tensions between citizens and law enforcement.

3. Foreign Policy:

• Isolationism and "America First" Diplomacy: Trump’s foreign policy would likely continue to prioritize U.S. sovereignty over multilateralism. This could lead to withdrawal from international agreements (such as those on climate change or trade) and reduced involvement in global organizations like the United Nations or NATO. While this might appease parts of his base, it risks damaging long-standing alliances and reducing U.S. influence globally.
• Strained Relations with Allies: Trump's unpredictable approach to foreign policy has already strained relationships with traditional allies, particularly in Europe. Another four years could deepen these rifts, especially if Trump re-engages in trade wars or criticizes defense spending in NATO. This could make it harder for the U.S. to collaborate with allies on global challenges, such as climate change, pandemics, or security threats.
• Cozying Up to Authoritarian Regimes: Trump has shown admiration for strongmen like Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong-un, and others. A second term could see further engagement with authoritarian regimes at the expense of democratic allies, potentially emboldening autocratic leaders worldwide.
• Global Trade Wars: Trump has already demonstrated a willingness to engage in trade wars, particularly with China. More aggressive tariffs could spark retaliatory measures, leading to disruptions in global trade, higher prices for American consumers, and potential job losses in industries dependent on exports.

4. Environmental and Climate Policy:

• Rollbacks on Climate Initiatives: Trump has been a vocal skeptic of climate change, and another term would likely see further rollbacks on environmental regulations, including those related to clean energy. The U.S. might withdraw from international climate agreements and scale back efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This could have severe long-term consequences for the global effort to combat climate change and reduce America’s leadership role on this front.
• Increased Fossil Fuel Production: Trump's focus on "energy independence" would likely mean more investment in fossil fuels, including oil, gas, and coal. This could create jobs in those sectors but at the expense of clean energy industries and long-term environmental sustainability.

5. Impact on Institutions and Rule of Law:

• Judicial Influence: Trump has already reshaped the judiciary with his conservative appointments. A second term would likely solidify this, potentially for decades. Conservative judges could make rulings that shift the country to the right on issues like abortion, voting rights, gun control, and environmental regulation.
• Continued Attacks on Media: Trump’s antagonistic relationship with the media might intensify, with further attempts to discredit mainstream outlets. This could weaken trust in journalism and increase polarization, as more Americans turn to partisan news sources.
• Erosion of Norms: Trump's willingness to bypass norms (such as releasing tax returns or complying with subpoenas) could set dangerous precedents. Another four years could erode trust in the impartiality of the legal system, especially if Trump continues to challenge the authority of the courts or the independence of federal agencies.

Potential Positive Outcomes (from a Trump Supporter’s Perspective):

• Economic Growth: Trump’s focus on reducing regulations and cutting taxes might spur economic growth in certain sectors, particularly for businesses. Supporters argue that his policies would lead to job creation and increased GDP.
• Immigration Control: Supporters of stricter immigration policies may see tighter border security and lower rates of illegal immigration as a positive outcome.
• Stronger National Sovereignty: Trump’s "America First" approach appeals to voters who prioritize national sovereignty and oppose international agreements that they perceive as disadvantaging the U.S.
• Judicial Appointments: Many conservatives view Trump’s judicial appointments as one of his most significant accomplishments, ensuring a rightward shift in the courts for years to come.

Potential Negative Outcomes (from a Trump Opponent’s Perspective):

• Damage to Democratic Norms: Critics fear that Trump’s approach could further erode democratic norms, weaken institutions, and lead to authoritarian tendencies within the government.
• International Isolation: Critics also worry that Trump’s isolationist policies could weaken U.S. alliances, making the country more vulnerable on the global stage.
• Social Division: Trump’s polarizing rhetoric could exacerbate existing divisions, leading to more civil unrest and social strife.

In summary, a second Trump presidency could lead to significant shifts in U.S. policy, both domestically and internationally. While it might deliver on promises of economic nationalism and deregulation, it risks deepening social and political divisions, isolating the U.S. from its allies, and undermining democratic institutions and norms.