Trump is full of great ideas. It's a shame that they're so bad.

Some elections involve big questions: Should slavery be extended to the Western states? How should the federal government respond to the Great Depression? How long should the US military stay in Iraq?

Then there are the small elections.

These are those in which candidates propose small, carefully crafted ideas to win the support of key constituencies: for example, passing targeted tax cuts or a small expansion of the social safety net.

And then there is this election, whatever it is.

Vice President Kamala Harris is running a classic small-scale campaign on many issues. She has proposed lowering the cost of prescription drugs, expanding the tax deduction for startups, and passing laws against price gouging in supermarkets – among other laudable but small-scale ideas.

Her campaign has a big idea behind it: to restore the abortion rights that were taken away by the Dobbs decision through a new law. But it is primarily about returning to the status quo of a few years ago and reversing a fundamental change that has already taken place in the country, rather than bringing about a new one.

Donald Trump, on the other hand, touts big ideas. The problem is that most of them are terrible and voters aren't clear about which ones he would seriously pursue.

A group of his former aides drafted Project 2025, a drastic plan to dismantle the executive branch and give the president sweeping powers. The proposal is so unpopular that his campaign team has repeatedly and unconvincingly rejected it.

But even putting aside those ideas, he has single-handedly put forward some dramatic proposals: imposing a blanket tariff on all imported goods, deporting millions of immigrants, abolishing the Department of Education, rolling back the Biden administration's efforts to combat climate change, pardoning the Jan. 6 defendants, launching politically motivated prosecutions of his opponents, and reducing aid to Ukraine in its fight against Russia—to name just a few.

The consequences of these proposals would be devastating. Economists warn that the tariffs could boost inflation by as much as 1.2 percent and cost a typical middle-class household more than $2,600 a year. Mass deportations would tear families and communities apart, trigger labor shortages and slow job growth. The situation on everything from democracy to climate change would get worse.

In that context, Harris's small-scale campaign makes sense: It keeps Trump's big, bad ideas in the spotlight and clears a path out of the Republican Party for Trump-skeptical Republicans and conservative-leaning independents. But it offers a strange contrast. It's like asking your friends where you want to go for dinner and one suggests Applebee's, the other a multi-state crime spree.

Still, it can be difficult to convince voters of the risks of Trump's ideas. Many remember similar apocalyptic warnings during his 2016 campaign and feel that his actual presidency wasn't so bad. Others believe his simple ideas could work. Polls show that narrow majorities support his plans for tariffs and mass deportations, apparently unaware or disbelieving of the disastrous impact they will have on the economy. And Trump is throwing out so many ideas in such a haphazard way that some voters simply don't believe he will implement any of them.

After all, he has proposed building 10 futuristic “freedom cities” on federal land and developing flying cars. No one believes he will actually do that. And he has failed to follow through on most of his 2016 campaign proposals. According to a PolitiFact count, he has kept only 23% of his promises. That includes some of his biggest and most memorable pledges, like building a border wall with Mexico and repealing the Affordable Care Act.

There's something sad about all this. Trump's pre-politician fame and loyal fan base give him unprecedented freedom to propose bold ideas that would bankrupt other politicians. But he squanders that freedom on proposals that would destroy existing institutions and harm the weak. When he has a good idea – like rebuilding America's roads, bridges and airports – he lacks the ability to implement it, and he leaves it to his successor.

At its best, a presidential election can strengthen Americans' will to do great things: break up monopolies, rejuvenate the space program, or improve access to health care, to name just a few examples from the past. We won't have such elections this year, and it may be a while before the conditions are right for another election that focuses on bold proposals.

When that time comes, hopefully the big ideas won't be bad at the same time.