Soon after former President Donald Trump delivered his speech accepting the Republican Party’s nomination for the US Presidential elections to be held this November, incumbent Democratic President Joe Biden decided to react to it with a set of facetious posts on the social media site, X. “I’m stuck at home with COVID, so I had the distinct misfortune of watching Donald Trump’s speech to the RNC (Republican National Convention),” Biden, who had just tested positive for the virus, posted. He then followed it up with a few more posts trying to counter what Trump had said in his 92-minute acceptance speech at his party’s convention last week.
Not many hours after that, Biden, 81, withdrew from the race, after pressures from his party members mounted in the wake of his visible cognitive decline, which came into sharp public focus during his disastrous performance in a debate against Trump in late June. On Sunday, he endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic candidate. The Democrats have barely four months in which to overhaul their campaign with a brand new candidate.
In the meantime, Trump, who survived an assasssination attempt barely a week ago, and was formally nominated by his party at its jubilant national convention last week, seems stronger than ever in the contest–something that the Democrats, with or without Biden as their candidate, seem to be still in denial about.
One of the biggest blunders in politics anywhere in the world is when you don’t take your opponent seriously. If you make that mistake it can often be suicidal.
Let’s rewind back in political history to a terrain that could be more familiar to our readers. Before the 2014 elections when the rise of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and, more specifically Narendra Modi, was perceptible, many in the ruling Congress-led government, took it lightly. Rahul Gandhi, who was then Vice-President of the Congress Party, famously flippantly said: “The Opposition has good marketing skills. There is ‘chamak, naach, gaana’. They are selling combs to bald men. Now there is a new group of people who are trying to give them haircuts.”
He wasn’t alone in dismissing Modi and the BJP. Even as record crowds thronged Modi’s rallies with millions turning up to hear his powerful speeches, the ruling regime of the time as well as many in the media were in denial. Leading editors spewed editorials that were coloured by their own political inclinations and beliefs. In fact, in that era, swathes of the mainstream media, which is today labeled as being a lapdog of the current regime, were comfortably ensconced in the lap of another regime–one that was in power then. And most of them dismissed the idea of Modi and the BJP being able to win.
Remarkably, people have forgotten that because as the cliche goes: public memory is notoriously short. As it happened, Modi led the BJP to a massive victory in 2014 and his party and its allies have been in power ever since, winning a second term in 2019 and a third this year. In the end, the bald men did buy combs and opt for haircuts. Gandhi’s party, incidentally, was decimated in 2014, managing to win just 44 of the Lok Sabha’s 543 seats, a rather drastic haircut.
Yet, if we go back to all the public statements that leaders in the Congress and its allied parties made about Modi and the BJP back in the days before the 2014 elections, one voice stands out. In mid-2013, nearly a year before the elections would obliterate his party, Jairam Ramesh, a party veteran and then a Union minister, told a newspaper: “He (Modi) will certainly impose a challenge on us. He represents not just a managerial challenge, but also an ideological challenge.” Like the child who blurted out the truth in Hans Christian Andersen’s The Emperor’s New Clothes, back in the day, Ramesh was a lone voice. And, unfortunately, one that not many may not have heeded.
Democrats & the Media: In Denial Mode
Last week America’s Republican Party held its national convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, to formally announce Donald Trump as the party’s official nominee for the presidential election. However, if you were a fly on the wall without being politically aligned to either the Democrats or the Republicans in America’s dual party system, the four-day extravaganza could seem like a victory celebration. It was like Trump had already become President and this was a display of pageantry, pomp, and celebratory jubilation.
Second, compared to previous national conventions, it was extraordinarily well-organised. The selection and sequencing of speakers was well-calibrated; the right quotient of celebrity was ensured; and, in the grand finale, Trump delivered a speech that (by his standards) was toned down and largely rant-free. Among those who spoke and endorsed his nomination were many Republicans who had earlier opposed him, criticised him, and even strongly denounced him. Now, they all appeared to be owing their allegiance to him.
Third, coming days after he survived an assassination attempt when a sniper shot at him and he miraculously escaped with an injury to the ear, people attending the convention, which brought 50,000 visitors to Milwaukee, universally exuded emotional sympathy and public displays of affection for Trump, a political leader who is considered to have deeply divided America.
Trump’s speech, which he is believed to have re-written after the assassination attempt, had all the usual touch points: his overarching slogan, Make America Great Again (MAGA); his resolve to stop illegal immigration and to send back illegals; his promise to cut taxes, generate jobs by kickstarting domestic manufacturing, accelerate oil drilling, rejuvenate the auto industry, and control inflation.
He said he would ensure that the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East would end and promised that he stood for uniting the country and that his government would be for all Americans and not partisan.
Pretty standard election rhetoric? Yes, absolutely. But the reaction to the Republican convention in America’s mainstream media was marked by cynicism and strong critique. America’s leading newspapers, television news channels, and other outlets don’t make bones about their antipathy toward Trump. In fact, they have for long undermined his rise and the challenge he poses to the Biden-led Democrats.
Before he decided to withdraw his candidacy, Biden himself was under siege from his own party. His performance at a recent public debate with Trump showed him to be an aging man, forgetful, incoherent, and, often, completely lost. It is astonishing that at the helm of the world’s most powerful country with unparalleled influence and clout over much of the globe and armed with formidable nuclear weaponry is an 81-year-old man whose cognitive abilities are clearly failing him.
The US President is both the head of state and head of government of the United States of America, and Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. Such power in the hands of a man who is mentally failing is not only a travesty for Americans but for the entire world. By stepping aside and endorsing Harris, he has done the right thing but it is probably quite late in the day. The Democrats will have to re-double their efforts and strategies for the election, which is barely four months away.
Now consider Trump. After narrowly escaping getting killed by a sniper’s bullet, Trump, who at 78 is only three years younger than Biden, stood up, fist-pumped, and mouthed the word, “Fight!” (an image that has by now become enduring around the world). The next morning he appeared in public with a bandaged ear and no worse for the wear.
At his acceptance speech last week, he might have miss-stated facts (news channels and publications have been double-quick in pointing those out), bragged overly about his own achievements, and promised a too-good-to-be-true picture of the future. How many successful politicians (think of any country in the world, including India) don’t do that?
If, however, you compare Trump’s performance with Biden’s–during speeches, meetings, and debates–is there any doubt who could inspire more confidence among voters?
America’s Great Divide
American politics is unique in many ways, chief among them is its dual-party system where politics is almost entirely dominated by either the Republicans or Democrats, and third parties rarely win seats in Congress, state legislatures, or even at the local level.
In recent years, especially since the rise of the right, and the emergence of Trumpism, which is a blend of nationalism, anti-immigration, and withdrawal from America’s role in the world, the dual-party system has led to sharp divisiveness in politics, in society, and between people.
One manifestation of this is the emergence of echo chambers: each side is siloed in a way that it blocks out everything from the other side. Sometimes this means one side is blinded to what is happening on the other side.
Trump’s first term as President (2017-2021) was marked by chaos and controversy. He rolled back previous achievements, unleashed ill-founded policies, and upended US foreign policy. His approval rating when he demitted office was a paltry 34%. Next, in 2020, Trump lost an election to Biden.
However, there are things that have changed since then. His current campaign is quite different. For one, Biden’s late exit can give Trump a clear advantage. But there are other factors. In the run-up to this year’s election, Trump has achieved more: first, he has been unanimously accepted as the leader of the Republican Party (unlike in the past, there are few dissenters); his strategists have garnered the support of minorities such as Blacks and Hispanics in larger numbers; and he has chosen a running mate, J.D. Vance, who at 39 is young and could well be the successor of his MAGA ideology.
These are some of the factors that add considerable strength to Trump’s prospects in the coming elections.
The campaign of the Democrats, on the other hand, is in a state of disarray. A dithering candidate who stubbornly refused to move aside may have finally withdrawn but in many ways, it is back to the starting block for the party. If it was ironic to see the President of the USA take to social media to post feeble repartees in response to a speech made by his increasingly formidable challenger, it was pathetic to see him stubbornly hold on to a bid to contest for another term when it was clear that he was obviously mentally deteriorating. And now, after he has quit the race at such a late stage, he has compounded the problem that his party and the new candidate face.
As ironic as the derision in his X posts were after Trump’s speech at the Republican convention is the fact that the legacy he so selfishly wanted to embellish with a second term will now be forever blemished by what he did in the last stages of his presidency.
For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/
