How Trump won the US election

TREVOR SUDAMA

THERE WAS a general anticipation that the 2024 US presidential election would have been a very close contest. As it turned out, Donald Trump secured a decisive victory and even won the majority of the popular vote. The slippage of votes for the Democratic Party from 2020 was significant and revealing.

The focus of the Republicans on the increases in the cost of living and on unchecked immigration clearly benefited them but these, in my view, were secondary issues. Some of the major reasons for this election outcome may be traced to aspects of the basic character of American society and the enduring beliefs and prejudices held by the majority of its rank-and-file citizens.

The results exposed the self-congratulatory illusions about the exceptionalism and solidity of American democracy, the commitment to the rule of law, equality before the law, independence of critical institutions of state, checks against abuse of power and rational, sober and elevated political discourse.

Yet, this is a country in which the majority voted for a man convicted of many offences by a court of law, who has vowed to overturn court decisions and pardon those convicted of the violent assault on the Capitol building and of other crimes, who has vowed to weaponise the Department of Justice against his opponents, who has engaged in the most vicious, violent, derogatory and intimidating political diatribe, and who the Supreme Court has granted almost total immunity from prosecution for his actions as president.

As in other countries, the majority of Americans see the institutions of democracy as somewhat removed from and irrelevant to their day-to-day challenges of existence. In a state of dissatisfaction and discontent they are no less susceptible to the amplification of grievance, to misinformation and flagrant untruths, and vulnerable to demagogic pledges of immediate redress and restitution as has been experienced elsewhere.

Thus, the dire warnings about promised dictatorial rule, concentration of unchecked power, suppression of rights and freedoms, and the general erosion of democracy have had little traction among the majority. The case for the avowed superiority of American democracy as practised is not very compelling.

American society is propelled by an extreme form of social Darwinism in which only the strong and ruthless deservedly survive and ascend to the top and where the end justifies the means. It is one in which material success is lauded above all others and the exemplar of this jostling, striving and aggressive mode of existence is the successful businessman.

Despite his deficiencies, Donald Trump is held in the highest esteem by the majority of Americans on the basis of his alleged business acumen, resilience, strength of will, and determination in achieving financial success. This expertise is regarded as a valuable asset for the efficiency and effectiveness of government as a business operation.

This engagement of continuous and energetic no-holds-barred competition for ascendency tolerates a diversity of means by which success is attained whether fair or foul, including violence and intimidation in various forms.

It is no accident that in pursuit of the presidency Trump is not restrained by any norms or standards of civil conduct and employs violent, inflammatory, abusive and condemnatory rhetoric, which is applauded by millions and becomes normal behaviour with little negative consequence.

Thus, the promise that the enemy within must be totally annihilated by any means is par for the course. The voting results seemed to have approved of this method of dealing with opponents.

In this context, the violence to be visited on illegal immigrants by private citizens and the state is easily justified on the basis of their alleged destructive transgressions on the American society and economy. Trump is merely an extreme example of the latent violent impulses of the society (including its love affair with guns).

In light of this inherent characteristic, the proclamation by Kamala Harris of peaceful and harmonious co-existence, of democracy, equity and inclusion (DEI) and of the nebulous promise of America turned out to have resonance only with the minority.

Misogyny seems to be an ingrained disposition of American society, in which respect it differs from the majority of other developed countries. By his public and private behaviour and demeaning rhetoric about women – whether the appeal or lack of it, of their appearance, their role as sex objects for the gratification of males, their denial of rights to reproductive freedoms, their assigned traditional role as secondary contributors to society, or the necessity for their subjection to male discipline and tutelage (eg Daddy Trump), which has come home to spank the misbehaving daughter (rebellious American women) and set her on the right path – he was able to appeal to the basic misogynistic and paternalistic impulses of a majority of voters, including many women.

The historically engrained prejudice of the majority of white Americans against people of non-white origin, especially Africans and Latinos, and the accepted notion of white dominance of the society, has been exploited for its electoral appeal.

Given that Harris is a black woman of African and Asian heritage and given the misogynistic nature of the society, she was saddled with a double disadvantage. It is not surprising that she polled a minority of both white and Latino male and female voters, despite the public contempt for people of Latino heritage forthcoming from Trump’s Republican platform.

Interestingly, the total of black male voters who cast their votes for Trump and those who abstained constituted a majority of the black male population eligible to vote. In light of the above general prejudice against blacks, one may speculate whether the election of Barack Obama in 2008 was an aberration.

The overpowering fear of the majority of white Americans of being overwhelmed by the increasing presence of the non-white population and of losing their dominance in the society was an emotion which Trump fully exploited to his advantage. He projected himself as the only hope for achieving this undesirable encroachment on the American way of life with its alien norms, culture and values. This electoral strategy paid huge dividends.