Magnum.ng

U.S. Elections: Why The 45th President Trump Would Return As 47th (1)

As prominent figures like Elon Musk, who is on the path to becoming the world’s first trillionaire, advocate for former President Donald Trump, and musical icons like Be­yoncé, Taylor Swift, Eminem, and Bruce Springsteen lend their support to Vice President Kamala Harris, the November 5 presidential election is being tightly contested, with the race said to be in a dead heat as both candidates are tied in opinion polls conducted by CNN.

So, by and large, who becomes the next occupant of the White House, from January 20, 2025, is being de­fined by those in the commanding heights of hardcore business and show business as detailed above.

That is why the American presidential race re­mains a source of fascination, a maze, and even an enigma to those of us looking in from the outside due to its constant drama featuring unique political twists and turns arising from gaffes and other idiosyncrasies of the contestants or their allies. For example, as the anniversary of the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel approached, threats were made against synagogues in New York City. Earlier this year, there were bomb threats aimed at schools in Springfield, Ohio, follow­ing warnings from Trump about Haitian immigrants allegedly harming pets in the area. Just as a misspeak about other sensitive issues by leaders from both sides of the campaigns- be it Trump’s or Harris’s support­ers- results in the rise and fall of the needle in their popularity barometer.

Trump and Harris

Notably, there have been two assassination attempts on the Republican candidate, Donald Trump. The first occurred in Butler, Pennsylvania, where he was shot at and narrowly escaped, with a bullet grazing his earlobe. The second was thwarted when a secret service agent intercepted an individual hiding in the bushes near Trump’s Palm Beach golf course during a game.

Also in a manner astonishing to most observers, mid-way through the race, the incumbent President Joe Biden withdrew from pursuing his mandatory second-term opportunity and yielded the ticket to Vice President Harris who did not contest for the ticket through party primaries as is customary.

That is not all the intrigues.

While the Democratic National Committee (DNC) linked the school bomb threats in schools in the state of Ohio to Trump’s statements about Haitian immi­grants, they have failed to admit how their portrayal of Trump as a threat to democracy might have con­tributed to the assassination attempts on his life. This reveals the double standards often present in politics, both in established democracies like the U.S. and in developing ones in the African continent like Nigeria, South Africa, Ghana, Kenya, and Egypt where pre and post-election violence often define civic exercise. In comparison, the unwholesome political situation unfolding around the world appears even more dire in Venezuela and Haiti, countries near the U.S. which is a nation that is acclaimed as the global beacon of de­mocracy; but where democratic values and institutions seem to have been greatly eroded in the course of the campaigns for the 2024 presidential elections.

In Haiti for instance, a weakened presidency has given way to militia-led governance characterized by brutality. Meanwhile, in Venezuela, the sitting presi­dent claimed victory in a contested election without disclosing the results. When contrasted with the po­litical challenges in the U.S., these examples illustrate the broader decline in democratic standards, even in a country as influential as the U.S., which prides itself as the bastion of democracy.

It’s worth considering that the current threats to democracy might not be solely linked to the DNC’s nar­rative that Trump’s refusal to accept the 2020 election results, which led to the Capitol Hill incident during the certification process, poses a danger. Instead, the real danger to democracy could be seen in the ruling party’s actions aimed at excluding Trump and Robert Kennedy Jr. (who left the DNC to run as an indepen­dent) from the ballot in the 2024 election—a strategy some describe as a “kitchen sink” approach.

It’s notable that, despite numerous legal challeng­es and even surviving an assassination attempt, Mr. TrumpandtheRepublicanNationalCommittee(RNC) are neck-and-neck with the Democratic National Com­mittee (DNC) and its candidate, Vice President Kamala Harris, as reflected in the latest CNN polls, which tend to be biased in favor of the DNC and Harris. This situa­tion contrasts with the stance of the Washington Post and Los Angeles Times, both of which, for the first time in a long time, have chosen not to endorse any can­didate, citing a desire to maintain independence and allow readers to make their own choices. In the case of Washington, it is a decision that has had a backlash as critics attribute the none endorsement of either of the candidates to the owner, Jeff Bezos’s inclination not to take a gamble that would have negative consequences on him and his business empire including the e-com­merce giant Amazon.

Amazingly, such prebendal politics that were thought in the past to be only in the precinct of third-world politics are manifesting in the U.S. thought to be the world’s bastion of democracy.

Notably, this is the first time since 1986 that the Washington Post has refrained from endorsing a can­didate, the last instance being when it withheld sup­port for then-presidential candidate Jimmy Carter. The publication’s explanation that its decision was aimed at preserving readers’ autonomy in choosing their candidate has not vitiated the angst from its critics.

It’s striking that while President Biden and Vice President Harris emphasize the narrative that Trump is a threat to democracy—a rhetoric some believe is fueling violence and attempts on Trump’s life—Trump is simultaneously being blamed for his anti-abortion stance. He is alleged to have influenced the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, a landmark ruling that had made abortion legal nationwide, and Trump has made the case that the abortion decision should be determined by individual states, not a na­tional policy.

Somehow, the issue of reproductive rights has gained traction for Harris’s campaign, as many Amer­ican women believe that the government should not decide the right to have an abortion. However, if it is okay for the government to prosecute those who assist others in attempting suicide—typically under Section 2 of the Suicide Act 1961, requiring prosecution approval by the Director of Public Prosecutions—why shouldn’t the government have an interest in cases involving pregnant individuals ending the lives of unborn chil­dren through abortion?

Moreover, it’s intriguing that while the government heavily regulates euthanasia, with involuntary eutha­nasia being illegal across all 50 U.S. states, the protec­tion of unborn life seems less prioritized. Therefore, it seems inconsistent to me, as it doesn’t appear logically sound. Nonetheless, this point of making abortion at a point in time illegal is one that the DNC candidate has emphasized by making it a selling point and lever­aging it as a political advantage, given its popularity among Democrats and women across the political divide generally.

However, the matter of reproductive rights is complex and complicated by the presence of a large Catholic population in the U.S., whose doctrine opposes abortion, alongside a significant evangelical base.

Remarkably, both groups generally are not support­ive of the LGBTQ policies that Kamala Harris and the DNC promote. Thus, it is not surprising that Vice Pres­ident Harris, the second female candidate after Senator Hillary Clinton to run for president with a major party, faces significant challenges in her bid to return to the White House as the country’s number one citizen.

In addition to the aforementioned headwinds against Harris’s presidential bid, what baffles me the most is that despite the intense pressure Mr. Trump has faced from the ruling party—including being im­peached by the House of Representatives (though not convicted by the Senate) and the numerous legal bat­tles he has been slammed with since announcing his candidacy last year—he remains the candidate to beat.

In discussions with friends around the world, who are engaged in various fields, the general expectation was that former President Trump would be impris­oned and thus ineligible for the ballot, let alone be a viable contender in an election now just days away. Yet, defying the odds, Trump, known for his resil­ience, has emerged as a front-runner, even though media outlets and pollsters favoring Vice President Harris often present the race as being on Knive’s edge or even suggest that Harris leads in the opinion polls. It feels reminiscent of 2016 when, as Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton became increasingly likely, the DNC rallied high-profile figures like former President Barack Obama and Michelle Obama to campaign on Clinton’s behalf. Despite their efforts, Senator Clinton ultimately lost the election to Trump.

Currently, once again, influential figures like the Obamas, and Clintons, and popular artists such as Be­yoncé, Taylor Swift, Bruce Springsteen, and Eminem amongst others are actively campaigning for Kamala Harris. In contrast, Trump’s growing support comes without the backing of former presidents of the repub­lican stock such as former President George Bush Jnr and ex-Vice Presidents Dick Cheney and Mike Pence, or major music stars who have not displayed support openly for Trump, yet has remained the candidate to beat.

However, his popularity is bolstered by tech billion­aire Elon Musk, who has stirred attention by offering through his Super Pac $1 million to registered voters in seven swing states willing to sign a letter protesting government restrictions on free speech.

It is worthy to underscore the fact that Trump’s campaign focuses on both domestic and internation­al issues. He emphasizes “kitchen table” concerns like the rising cost of living, asserting that Americans had better economic conditions during his first term (2016-2020) than they are currently under the watch of President Biden and Vice President Harris.

On foreign policy, Trump highlights that, under his administration, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin did not engage in warfare with Ukraine—a conflict that began during the Obama administration with the 2014 annexation of Crimea and resumed under Joe Biden’s presidency, pitching NATO against Russia with a po­tential to degenerate to a global conflict as ally nations to Russia like North Korea are taking side with Russia as evidenced by North Korean soldiers being trained in Russia. Furthermore, commentators suggest that President Putin tends to act when he perceives the U.S. leadership as weak.

0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x