I actually did read the whole piece. The problem is with your premise. You assume Trump is a rational transactional actor, and you assume Harris is inflexibly devoted ti certain principles. But neither of those assumptions are true.

Take Harris first. One of the principal points made against her is that voters aren’t sure where she stands on issues because her stances have changed between her last run for president and this one. I do t know if that’s fair. She has changed her position, but generally in order to moderate her stance and bring it more in line with the median voter. I see that as a good thing, not a weakness. It means she’s willing to listen to people who disagree with her and make compromises when necessary to build coalitions and solve problems. I also think it’s a quality that would make it possible for her to adjust her stance on Israel and Ukraine depending on the facts on the ground. In other words, Harris is essentially a pragmatist, not an ideologue, and that’s what we need right now.

As for Trump, he’s neither. He’s an egotist surrounded by ideologues who will do what they recommend as long as he sees it ensuring his political survival. He has no depth of understanding of foreign policy or history or international law, and will defer to “his generals” and others in his ambit, and they ARE people who see the world in terms of black and white. JD Vance and the theobros are about as Manichaean as they come.