After months of campaigns, rocked with scandals and controversies, lewd stories and mudslinging, Americans will vote to elect their president tomorrow. WALE AJETUNMOBI, who participated in a U.S. Foreign Press Center Tour on campaign reporting, examines some of the issues that may influence the outcome of the historic election.
The die is cast. All campaign trains have stopped. Attention has shifted to the United States (U.S.) as citizens of the world’s most powerful nation and most advanced democracy go to the polls to elect President Barack Obama’s successor a new. The eight-year reign of Obama, an Afro-American leader, has been eventful, bringing the U.S. out of its worst recession since the 30s.
Four candidates are jostling to succeed Obama as he steps out of the White House next year. They are: former American First Lady and one-time U.S. Secretary of State Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of the Democratic Party; billionaire businessman Donald John Trump of the Republican Party; former New Mexico State governor Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party and Mrs. Jill Stein of the Green Party.
In the past five months, the candidates traversed the length and breadth of the U.S. landscape, canvassing for support. The U.S. political atmosphere became tense, as candidates and their supporters held rallies. Although, four Americans are in the race to the White House, the race is clearly between the duo of Mrs. Clinton and Trump, representing the two largest political parties – the Democrat and the Republican.
The run-up to the race has been filled with a plethora of mudslinging and lewd stories that shook the America’s 240-year-old democracy to its foundation. Trump and Mrs. Clinton took their rivalry beyond politics. They went personal, unsparing in their choices of words. Their tantrums blew open many of their secret dealings and ‘guarded secrets’.
The Trump-Clinton clash drew unprecedented interference in the U.S. election by the Russia, America’s sworn opponent on capitalist system and foreign policy. Russian President Vladimir Putin has been accused of covertly deploying hackers to undermine the America’s electoral system.
Giving credibility to the allegation at a state event, Putin praised Mr. Trump’s candidature, a development that was seen as an indication of possible alliance between the Grand Old Party’s (GOP’s) candidate and the Kremlin, a key economic and power player in the East and Europe.
The discord between Mrs. Clinton and Trump got a breaking point, where both candidates abandoned the nucleus of their political campaigns and threw muds at each other. In the ensuing crossfire, the duo smeared their cherished names and characters. Their families and businesses were not spared.
For several weeks during the campaigns, America’s polity was polarised. But the diatribe between the major gladiators only got their supporters excited. Millions of independent voters, with no attachment to either of the parties, were unmoved by the war of words between Mrs. Clinton and Trump.
As advanced and sophisticated as the U.S. democracy is, the events leading tomorrow’s presidential election showed that America’s political and electoral systems have no immunity to primitive sentiments and inconsistencies, that usually colour the credibility of electoral processes, especially in developing countries.
The Republican Party candidate said he would reject the whole election should the outcome turn out against his favour. As many watchers of the U.S. politics rightly posited, this is a “strange development” for a democracy seen as a superlative model.
Trump’s apprehension, though unfounded, was informed by the supposed spotlight on his peculiar character by the America’s mainstream media establishment. He felt there was high-level conspiracy against his campaign, with the aim of given his main challenger an undue advantage. This ostensibly made the GOP candidate to raise allegations that the electoral process was being rigged against him.
But there are key issues that would determine the outcome tomorrow’s election with a sharp division within the political class on what should be the “American Dream” in the 21st Century.
These include immigration policy; gun control and homeland security; healthcare insurance; rising students’ loan debt; jobs and minimum wage; local debt; foreign policy; ties with Russia, Iran and China; climate change and clean energy, and America’s engagement in foreign wars.
The ‘American Dream’ in focus
The presidential election is predicated on two words – American Dream. These words were repeatedly cited throughout the campaign period by all the candidates jostling for Oval Office. To outsiders, American Dream could be seen as a mere patriotic expression. But for the American voters, these two words are the determinants of who gets their ballot.
American Dream represents a set of ideals on which the U.S. founding fathers laid the foundation of the country. In appreciation of the country’s pronounced diversity, America’s forebears believed the continuous existence of Amrica would depend on two key values – freedom and prosperity.
All citizens have convergent views about freedom, but opinion is divided about its prosperity. There have been growing anxieties, especially among White middle-class that sees America falling apart. The sentiment was largely informed by the decline in the number of white middle-class and the increase in the population of immigrants taking over available jobs reserved for citizens.
About 37 per cent of white voters, who responded to a recent poll conducted by John Zogby, a renowned American pollster, believed American adults get jobs that pay less than the previous jobs. The polls’ results showed that people believed many American have not kept up with the cost of living, because of the static wages.
“There is a real sense of fear among the white Americans. From 2005 to 2006, three out of four Americans said the American Dream is alive and well. But today, what we are hearing from many people in the white middle-class is that, ‘I am afraid of no longer being middle-class’ and ‘I am afraid that my children will not be’. This is a real fear”, Zogby told The Nation.
Also, with the transformation of the U.S. economy in the last two decades, some Americans believe the country had lost its old manufacturing and information economy, without quickly replacing it with the next economy to catch up with its competitors. This has led to the fear that America’s prosperity is on the reverse.
This anxiety is the basis of the Trump’s campaign. The GOP candidate believes America is losing its essence and needs a reset to attain its political destiny. He promised to make “America great again”.
Clinton, on the other hand, believes American Dream is on course, citing the number of entrepreneurs inspired by the Obama administration, which brings about regular job creation and increased prosperity.
Candidates’ immigration plans
There is a report that, by 2042, America would be a nation of minority of whites and majority of non-whites. The rationality of this report is daily reinforced by influx of Latinos, Arabs, Muslims and people, whose beliefs and values, are in anathema to the ideals espoused by the U.S. founding fathers.
The widening demography of non-whites, who entered the U.S. illegally, has got some Americans thinking and asking what happened to the immigration policy.
Some voters agree with Trump on his plan to stop illegal immigration and initiate reforms that would shut the American door against Latinos and Arabs.
Immediately Trump announced his plan to run for the presidency, he claimed Mexico had been sending “violent criminals”, including rapists, into the U.S, calling for the deportation of more than 12 million undocumented immigrants.
If he wins, Trump said, he would build a wall against Mexicans entering the U.S. through its border with State of Arizona. He buttressed his plan when he met with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, last August, saying Mexico would be made to finance the construction of the wall or be subject to penalties.
After the meeting with Mexican President, Trump returned to Arizona to release his 10-point immigration agenda. He pledged to build a wall across the entire southern U.S. border, triple the number of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, require businesses nationwide to use e-Verify to determine the work eligibility of their employees, cut federal support to sanctuary cities, and restrict legal immigration, particularly the flow of guest workers.
The Republican party presidential hopeful plans to end the U.S. policy of granting citizenship to the U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants. His immigration plan has generated controversies, with many saying it would have negative impact on the American diversity.
Mrs. Clinton’s immigration plan wants to ensure a comprehensive legislation that includes a path to full and equal citizenship for undocumented immigrants. She pledged to introduce omnibus legislation during her first 100 days in the White House.
She promised to expand Obama’s executive actions that defer deportation and grant temporary work visas for nearly half of the undocumented migrants, despite Supreme Court’s ruling in June which upheld a temporary ban on one of them.
The Democratic Party’s flag bearer would rather want humane immigration enforcement and detention practices that would spare children and vulnerable people from confinement in large facilities. She promised to create a new agency that would co-ordinate the immigration policy across all levels of government and help immigrants integrate into their communities.
Last year, Mrs. Clinton supported Obama’s executive order to accept thousands of Syrian refugees into the U.S., but called for greater vigilance in screening the migrants. She warned against denying the refugees entry based on country of origin or religion.
Climate change and clean energy
Scientists have been buttressing the claims that the earth temperature is rising. They claim that the average earth temperature rose by 1.5°F over the past century, causing global warming, unstable weather condition and natural disasters. According to them, the global temperature is likely to rise to a threshold that could endanger the planet.
To Trump the anxiety is uncalled for. He believes that climate change poses insignificant threat, doubting that humans are contributing factors.
“I consider climate change to be not one of our big problems,” Trump said during a campaign before the GOP primaries.
In May, he outlined his energy reform plan, pledging to lead the country toward total energy independence while accounting for “rational environmental concerns” like clean air and water. His proposal called for expanding domestic production of oil and gas, voiding the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan and rejecting the 2015 Paris climate deal.
Having led the Obama administration’s 2012 establishment of a global initiative to reduce short-lived climate pollutants, Mrs. Clinton believes the U.S. must lead the global effort to reduce global warning and atmospheric pollution.
As president, Mrs. Clinton said she would aim to making the U.S. the world’s clean energy superpower when she announced her two proposals to fight climate change. The plans include installation of more than half a billion solar panels by the end of her first term, and the generation of enough renewable energy to power every U.S. home within 10 years.
She also vowed to fight Congress Republicans’ effort to undo President Obama’s Clean Power Plan, which set carbon emission limits across the U.S.
Gun control and internal security
Against the backdrop of increasing gun violence in the U.S., Homeland Security and gun control became topical in the campaign. Each candidate has divergent views on how the U.S. government should strengthen internal security. Interestingly, both Trump and Mrs. Clinton agree that home-grown terrorism and gun violence must be curtailed.
Mrs. Clinton unveiled a multi-pronged plan to defend the U.S. homeland against local criminals and terrorist attacks.
She said: “I believe weapons of war have no place on our streets. We may have our disagreements on gun safety regulations, but we should all be able to agree on a few things.
“If the FBI is watching you for suspected terrorist links, you shouldn’t be able to just go buy a gun with no questions asked. You shouldn’t be able to exploit loopholes and evade criminal background checks by buying online or at a gun show. If you are too dangerous to get on a plane, you are too dangerous to buy a gun in America.”
Trump openly supported gun control but opposed restriction on assault-weapon sales. This earned him an endorsement from the National Rifle Association (NRA).
Foreign policy
Despite its enormous military might, the U.S. is faced with a growing set of international challenges. The rise of emerging powers in the Middleeast and Southeast Asia provides new opportunities for partnership. It also creates potential challengers to the U.S. influence and interests globally. This is why foreign policy is at the heart of this presidential election.
Mrs. Clinton’s foreign policy seeks to cooperate with emerging superpowers, such as China and Noth Korea on a range of international challenges, including climate change, while keeping competition within acceptable limits.
She believes America should strengthen the NATO alliance and improving the energy security of European states, many of which rely on Russian natural gas. She wants tougher measures against Putin and wants the Russian president punished for supporting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
On Iran’s nuclear programme, Mrs. Clinton supports a multinational agreement with Tehran to stop its nuclear programme, noting that the U.S. must ensure compliance.
“We should anticipate that Iran will test the next U.S. president. They’ll want to see how far they can bend the rules. That won’t work if I am in the White House,” Mrs. Clinton said.
Trump criticised the nuclear agreement with Iran and said he would renegotiate it if he is elected. He openly praised Putin’s brand of leadership and said he would enjoy meeting the Russian leader.
Trump faulted the U.S. military tactics in Iraq. He also said the U.S. had nothing to gain from the battle to retake the city of Mosul from ISIS. He said the Obama administration timed the attack to boost Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy.
Hobson Choice before the voters
Personal character and integrity of Mrs. Clinton and Trump became germane issues in the throes of the campaign. It is believed that many Americans do not trust any of the candidates. They have expressed misgivings and reservations about their characters and mindsets.
Having been on the power corridor for more than 20 years, some believe Mrs. Clinton had used her influence to curry undue international patronage for her personal business. As the Democratic Party candidate laboured to put down the controversies generated by the Clinton Foundation’s international engagements, her e-mail scandal broke out and threatened to rock the boat of her campaign.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) team initially concluded that it would not institute a criminal case against Mrs. Clinton, but faulted the Democratic Party’s candidate for “extremely careless” in her handling of classified information. Mrs. Clinton denied that none of the e-mails sent via the private server was classified.
A few days ago, the FBI said it had strong evidence of wrongdoing against Mrs. Clinton in the e-mail scandal. This has cast a slur on her integrity, giving voters reasons to doubt her candidature to the U.S. presidency.
Trump’s albatross remains his volubility and unpredictable temperament. In the past few months, Trump made uncharitable comments against women, African-Americans, Hispanics, war veterans and Muslims.
Last month, Washington Post released a 2005 clip in which Trump used offensive words to qualify female genitals and boasted about molesting women. Many voters believe Trump’s ‘abnormal’ character and utterances are unbecoming of candidate for the U.S. presidency.
But tomorrow, American voters are caught between the devil and the deep-blue sea; they are faced with Hobson Choice to elect one of the two imperfect candidates.
Who would the Swing states favour?
The Swing states are states that can switch in favour of either Democrat or Republican, because both parties of almost equal following in those states. Latest polls have shown that states, such as Colorado, Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Georgia, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia have the power to swing in tomorrow’s election.
Neither Trump nor Clinton can boast of significant lead in these battleground states. Both candidates suffer in approval ratings. Only one-third of Americans think Mrs. Clinton is honest and trustworthy; 35 per cent of voters think Trump is dishonest. About 57 per cent of voters say they don’t share Mrs. Clinton’s values, while 62 per cent disagree with Trump’s values.
Substantial number of the voting population believes Mrs. Clinton has the right kind of temperament and personality to be a good president. Trump is at disadvantage.
To win these swing states, both candidates have channeled their campaign funds to hold rallies and woo undecided voters.
Likely effects of demographics on poll’s outcome
In previous U.S. elections, race and gender played key roles in determining the outcomes. These demographics have always been a huge dividing line in the U.S. election. The clash between Trump and Mrs. Clinton is no different, as 17 per cent of Hispanics and three per cent of black people back Trump, according to recent polling. This could prove significant in this election, because Hispanics account for more than one-fifth of the population in four key swing states.
Education is another major demographic division in the race. Among high school graduates or those with a lower level of education, Trump has the backing of 44 per cent, compared to Clinton’s 36 per cent support. States of Georgia and Nevada have a high proportion of people failing to graduate from high school, and this may prove to be battlegrounds for the Democratic Party.
To be continued
