Why this retired Army Lieutenant General and former Republican is voting for Kamala Harris

Ben Hodges spent nearly 40 years in the US Army, and served as the Commanding General of the US Army in Europe. Now, he’s speaking out about the threats of a second Trump presidency. 

Ben Hodges grew up in Jacksonville, Florida in a predominantly Republican household. 

“I was born into a Republican family in north Florida. Many years ago. I was Republican almost my entire life, I guess I would be in this camp of Reagan Republicans, that type of Republican,” he said.

That all changed after Donald Trump began showing authoritarian tendencies during his first term, and especially after he incited an attack on the US Capitol on January 6th. 

Having served in the military for almost 40 years, Hodges never endorsed a candidate, but with Trump on the ballot for the third straight election and the implications his return could have for the US both domestically and abroad,  the now-retired 3-star lieutenant general is speaking out about his support for Vice President Kamala Harris.

The below interview has been edited and condensed for brevity and clarity.

In December 2022, Donald Trump called for the termination of the Constitution due to his claims that the 2020 election was rigged. As someone that served in the military and as an American citizen, what comes to mind when you hear an American president say something like that?

Lt. Gen. Hodges: Well, of course I was horrified when I heard that somebody who himself raised his right hand and took that same oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, that the former president would toss out something as extreme as that was horrifying to me. And the idea that somehow the Constitution was so easily dispensed with. And then also in the face of the facts, numerous court cases, numerous investigations revealed that there was no fraud anywhere. But the fact that so many Americans would be willing to accept what Mr. Trump was saying really concerned me that this is not just about Trump, but that there are Americans who are willing to accept such a bold lie.

Why do you feel like it’s important to speak out against Trump right now, and what do you believe that a second Trump term would mean for the country?

Lt. Gen. Hodges: Look, I was a Republican. I was born into a Republican family in north Florida. Many years ago. I was Republican almost my entire life, I guess I would be in this camp of Reagan Republicans, that type of Republican. But after January 6th, I decided I could not be associated with the Republican Party anymore. And then I look at Donald Trump and the way he incited people, the way he showed such disrespect for our processes, which, our processes have never been perfect, but they are what most other people in the world want they aspire to, and that he was so callous about it. And then to get people fired up with claims that the election was stolen. I was in the leadership business for almost four decades as an army officer and the things you look for are integrity, reliability, somebody that always speaks the truth that respects our institutions.

And he exhibited none of those characteristics that I would expect from even a brand new lieutenant. Plus, I’ve always been turned off by people that just brag and brag and brag about what they did, especially when it’s not true or when they always need a scapegoat or have to blame somebody else for what happened. That kind of leadership is unacceptable in the US military and probably in most other institutions in America. 

So for me, the topper was January 6th, but also his constant comments that the election was stolen with zero evidence, and also when he says, ‘I’m not sure I would accept the outcome of an election’ in which he loses. So I don’t know how anybody that respects our constitution can actually want to support somebody like that. And unfortunately, a lot of people around him, including members of the Congress and governors and others, friends, I have family members, —  they’re willing to accept that, and that is a real concern.

Could you explain to our audience why you believe that active service military members and veterans as well should put their trust in Vice President Harris if she’s elected?

Lt. Gen. Hodges: So the thing about Vice President Harris, when she becomes president and our commander in chief, nobody will wonder for one second whether or not she’ll live up to her constitutional oath that whether or not she would obey the law, that she would respect our institutions, even if some people may not be in total agreement with all of her policies, nobody will wonder for a second  if she’ll try to throw out the results of an election. 

That’s always a concern with Donald Trump, the allies of the United States, not just NATO, but our friends around the world look to the United States for leadership as an ideal for what democratic governments should be like and how militaries and democratic governments should operate. And so much of our alliance network is based on trust that people are confident that if the United States says we will do something, we will actually do it.

And I think when President Harris says it, people will believe her. But leaders of the world know that Donald Trump is a transactional leader, that he’s always about making a deal. And I know for a fact that leaders of many of our NATO allies are very concerned about what it would mean to have Trump as the president, as a leader of NATO’s leading nation. They’re very concerned about that. 

And of course, the Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians, are all looking at that sort of vulnerability, which is a real problem for us. I also believe that a Harris administration would continue this emphasis on strong alliance networks standing up to Russia, standing up to China. I don’t see that as a likelihood in a Trump administration

One of many aspects of Project 2025, the far-right plan for a second Trump term, deals with the military, it deals with veterans, and there are some changes within that plan that talk about how healthcare would be administered for veterans. I was wondering if you have concerns that Project 2025 could change or hurt the quality of available healthcare for veterans?

Lt. Gen. Hodges: Project 2025 has been out there for some time, but Trump and his campaign did not start running away from it and try to distance themselves until people started taking a closer look at it and seeing what was involved and what the implications were. And he saw how unpopular it was. So then he does the typical Trump, ‘I have no idea who these people are,’ which is of course, it takes you five seconds to realize that’s not true because almost everybody involved in it has been on his team or has been a part of his previous administration. 

That also gives you an indication of the level of loyalty that someone could expect from Trump as a president. The parts of it that really concerned me, of course, were parts that pointed towards an authoritarian type government, one where civil servants would be dismissed in favor of political appointees.

That’s a concern. And also it reveals that they see veterans benefits as fair game, so that hundreds of thousands of veterans in America today, women and men from all our services that joined under the belief that because of their service, for which nobody gets rich, but they would have these benefits for health, especially disabilities. And now when you read into Project 2025 and you see that that may not be so. The authors of Project 2025, many of whom populate the Trump campaign or a potential Trump administration, they’re making it clear that all of these benefits are now on the table. And there’s a saying in the military, and I’m sure you’re familiar with it as well, that ‘people are policy.’ So when you look at the people that are in an administration, that tells you what the policy is going to be.

Another part of Project 2025 calls for deploying the National Guard  to American cities to round up undocumented immigrants who are in this country. And the idea is that the National Guard would then take these people to detention camps to be deported. As someone who served, how do you think this deployment of the armed forces onto American streets could affect our country?

Lt. Gen. Hodges: It is hard to imagine a worse scenario than women and men of our armed forces being put in the position of having to use force to round up people inside the United States. We still are ashamed of how we treated Japanese Americans in the immediate aftermath of Pearl Harbor. Hopefully we’re a lot smarter, more mature, and more educated than we were then. 

So the fact that a Trump administration would even consider that as a policy is very concerning to me. And then I put myself in the shoes of soldiers, women and men who might have to actually do that. You always want to know, okay, ‘what is my mission? What am I doing here? What are the rules for the use of force? What are the expectations? Who’s in charge of this whole thing?’ And this kind of a proposal seems to violate numerous laws or traditions about how we use the American military domestically to round people up at the point of a weapon. Who’s deciding who gets rounded up?

The guard belongs to the governors. The National Guard belongs to the governors until they’re federalized. And so if a possible President Trump contemplates federalizing the National Guard to do this, that’s going to of course require the Congress to support it. 

So I would hope that there would be enough people who understand our constitution and our laws that would have the courage to stand up to such a mobilization request. I cannot imagine how difficult it would be for a sergeant or a junior officer in such a unit to have to go into an apartment building to start getting families out that are believed to be illegal. 

And then finally, this is the job of law enforcement, not the military. I think it’s the wrong solution for an important issue that we face in the United States.

Do you think there would be a possibility that American citizens could end up getting arrested or detained in a situation like that?

Lt. Gen. Hodges: That’s exactly what would happen. It would be such a wide net that would be cast. And how do you make these determinations of who’s illegal, who’s not? And by the way, millions of people who are here in the United States illegally are working for American companies, whether it’s agriculture, construction service, etc.

So in my mind, either we’ve got to fix the policies or hold those employers accountable who are getting the labor at very cheap rates, and they’re not paying for healthcare. They’re not doing the things that an employer should normally do. If you eliminate that as an incentive, you’re going to cut down a lot on the flood of people trying to get to the United States where they can get work. 

I lived in Virginia for several years and I saw them all the time and in North Carolina where they were working for construction companies doing different things. So I think any policy about rounding up people needs to address part of the cause of them being here to begin with, which is illegal hiring practices.

The Biden-Harris administration passed the PACT Act, and so far it’s provided health benefits to over a million veterans. And what are your thoughts on that act and how do you think that Vice President Harris would build on the successes of the PACT Act?

Lt. Gen. Hodges: Well, I think a President Harris will talk about how they got this passed, even though there were Republicans that voted against it. And I hope that they will shine a very bright light on people like Ted Cruz and others who voted against it. 

So we should not allow Republicans to grab the narrative that somehow they’re the ones that are pro-defense, that they’re pro-veteran, because actually they vote against veteran friendly legislation all the time. And I think that this needs to be a central part of reaching voters, veterans who maybe they are conservative and much of their political outlook, but the so-called conservative Party, the Republicans actually act and vote against what’s best for veterans routinely, let alone the fact that they’re a terrible example of what it means to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. 

So I think I would imagine that the Harris-Walz campaign is going to make sure that all veterans know which Republicans have voted against veteran friendly legislation.

When Trump first ran in 2016, he mocked John McCain’s status as a POW. I know General John Kelly confirmed that he once referred to US soldiers as ‘suckers’ and ‘losers.’ He had said that in a 4th of July parade, he didn’t want wounded veterans to be a part of that because of how it would look. As someone who’s led soldiers during wartime and the sacrifice that comes from being in the military, how does it make you feel to hear a former commander in chief say that about people that served? And what have other veterans told you about their response to hearing those comments?

Lt. Gen. Hodges: I think people are disgusted. Certainly I am disgusted. I wouldn’t want to be in the same room with him. It’s hard to imagine how any veteran could support a man that denigrates the service of people like John McCain or soldiers who were wounded that somehow you don’t want to be around that. I mean, what leader would publicly denigrate the people you are leading? It is, for me, I think disgusting is the best word to describe it.

It’s rare that foreign policy or an issue of foreign policy is a top issue for voters. Vietnam is the one that comes to mind when you think of how foreign policy really dominated an election. But could you explain for our audience the differences on foreign policy between Vice President Harris and Donald Trump and why that should be a factor in a voter’s decision making if they’re kind of on the fence in this election?

So of course, in the world today, things are so interconnected, and America’s economy depends on stable markets around the world. America’s economy depends on freedom of navigation, so that ships carrying American exports of all types can reach their destination, plus the things that we are importing are able to reach us. 

So this war in Ukraine, for example, what Russia has done has destabilized Europe. It has put millions of Ukrainian refugees on the road into Europe. It has disrupted grain supplies which have directly affected food prices in the United States. It has disrupted energy supplies, which has directly affected American gas prices at the pump. So what’s happening in Ukraine because of Russian aggression has directly affected American prosperity. 

So it does matter, and the president, any president and any member of Congress ought to be able to explain to their voters why it matters to them, why stability and security in Europe is to our benefit, regardless of what other countries are paying for their own defense, stability and security is for our benefit. And then of course, the Chinese are watching very carefully to see, are we, the United States — do we have the political will and the military capability and the industrial capacity to help Ukraine defeat Russia as part of defending the international rules-based order, freedom of navigation, respect for sovereignty, respect for international law, respect for international agreements, respect for human rights?

The Chinese are waiting to see, are we really willing to do that? And if they see that we’re not, then I think the chance of them using aggression in the Pacific area in the South China Sea against the Philippines against Taiwan goes up. And so American foreign policy directly affects American domestic policy. It affects our everyday life. It’s just not as obvious perhaps as some other things.

I won’t ask you to enter Donald Trump’s mind, but he has a history of praising authoritarian leaders like Xi Jinping in China, Putin in Russia, Kim Jong-Un in North Korea, I think it was just recently that he talked about how tough Nicholas Maduro is in Venezuela. To hear him brag about these strong men, to really admire them and brag about how they admire him — what do you think it says about a potential second Trump term and how he’s going to approach that office?

Lt. Gen. Hodges: I think he is telling us loud and clear that that’s what he wants to be — he speaks about them almost with envy. You remember when he was talking to somebody, this was kind of a hot mic situation, and he was talking to somebody about how people stand up when Xi walks into the room. ‘I want my people to do that.’ 

I mean, can you imagine Abraham Lincoln or George Washington, or any great president in our history saying some nonsense like that? So it’s clear to me that that’s exactly what he wants, and he will continue given his narcissistic tendencies and just complete lack of respect for our Constitution that that’s what he’ll do. 

And unfortunately, if there’s another Trump administration, he will not be surrounded by people who will try to dampen or tamp down those tendencies, but instead sycophants who will encourage or accelerate those tendencies in hopes that they’re able to benefit from that sort of power as well. So this is a terrible danger.

That the fact that Trump wants, clearly wants to be an authoritarian leader, a fascist, if you will, is enough for me to vote against him.

Trump hinted in the run up to the 2016 election, and he’s made comments in this campaign, about the potential of the US exiting the NATO alliance. He didn’t do that the first time he was president. But as you pointed to just a moment ago, I mean, you won’t have those moderating voices that do appreciate the NATO alliance or what it means. Do you think there’s a real risk of the US withdrawing from NATO if Trump goes back into office?

Lt. Gen. Hodges: I think he would have if he could have. Last time, I think his former national security advisor, Mr. Bolton, talked about how President Trump stormed out of one of the NATO summits in Brussels, that he was prepared to try and walk away. 

Fortunately, the Congress in a bipartisan way, including Republicans, voted to create a law that makes it impossible for a president to unilaterally step away from the alliance. So even the Republican members of Congress knew that was a lunatic idea, but that doesn’t mean that if Trump were president again, that he could not do things or not do things that would hinder the alliance, that would disrupt the alliance, that would significantly degrade the effectiveness of the alliance even if the United States continued to remain. 

I’m having a hard time figuring out what good for America would come out of that. So his commentary about the alliance to me reveals a total misunderstanding or lack of care about why NATO is the most successful alliance in the history of the world. Every president since Truman has complained that our European allies and Canada have never invested enough in their own defense. That’s a legitimate complaint. Americans should demand that our allies pay more, especially those who are wealthy enough to have really nice social systems, but they depend on American security. 

That’s a legitimate complaint, and I think President Harris will work hard with our allies, who fortunately, now most of them are waking up because of what has happened, what Vladimir Putin is doing in Europe. People are realizing that, no kidding, you have to have capable defenses if you want to prevent a conflict from happening.