As I walked out of my Upper West Side polling station in New York City after casting my vote, the lack of energy in America’s most liberal city was palpable. The pins being sold just outside said “Keep Kamala and Carry On-a-la”, but the calmness was about to explode. 

Donald Trump’s stunning comeback forces an acknowledgement that Americans do not want to simply carry on. Much like India earlier this year. They are increasingly tired of the financial pain that started after the 2008 financial crisis, rendering many of them under-employed. The most powerful ingredients of rapid global economic growth in our lifetimes—globalisation and technological replacement—have ricocheted back to cause acute pain at the working-class Americans’ dining tables. And they are hoping, against the odds, that their ballot can overpower that bullet.

This is precisely the reason why, much like the re-emergence of the former President, a defining trend is now categorising the American election cycle. And, I would argue, the Indian election cycle too.

Incumbents Beware

This is now the third presidential election since 2016 when the incumbent party has been voted out, a trend not seen since the 1970s when Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan were voted in quick succession as inflation eclipsed all else. Once is an accident. Twice, a coincidence. Three times, a pattern.

In India, the lack of a majority for the incumbent party this year was an indication of that very problem that is proving difficult for any global leader to resolve. In fact, there has been a dissipation of existing power if not an outright change in every major government across the world this year—from the UK and Italy to Germany and Japan, and others.

As Bill Clinton’s political strategist Jim Carville stated prophetically thirty years ago, “It’s the economy, stupid.” But some would point out that the stock markets are at an all-time high and economic growth was at par in both Trump and Biden years. So, why the discontent? Didn’t life seem good enough?

Yes, but only for the elite, whether in the US or India. The elite are the real beneficiaries of the riches-to-riches story. How long can you ignore the larger population that now has to work an average of 2.5 jobs to keep the same lifestyle as a decade ago? In the case of India, too, yes there are cheap mobile phones and food handouts, but job prospects cannot keep up with young aspirations.

In this discontented mix, a message like Trump’s, which primarily centres around inflation and its many symptoms—immigration being an obvious one—will obviously be attractive. But so is that of any politician who offers a change in the existing status quo. It is akin to a company changing multiple CEOs in the hope its fortunes will change, not realising that the problem lies in the product itself.

The Polarisation Card Is Losing Its Edge 

This election has broken several myths—the overriding one being polarisation—including that echo chambers are permanent and defined and will not sway voters from their trenches. That certainly was the case in 2016, when Trump’s winnability was attributed to a fringe base of non-college-educated men. But in 2024, Trump’s winnability is attributed to virtually all subsets.

A case in point is young men, and shockingly for the democrats, young men of colour—whether Latino or Indian-American—swinging in Trump’s favour. The Left is finally realizing that they cannot club all minorities together, much like the Right in India is realizing the majority cannot always be a single voting bloc. Their loyalty, and more importantly, their ethics, are being questioned. I disagree. This was not a vote for the messenger, it was a vote for the message. 

This election has stuck a needle into the bubble of polarisation that the world has sworn by throughout the last decade. Both sides tried to polarise voters, whether it was Trump with immigration or Harris with abortion. But it did not work. There are voters who have chosen Trump and abortion rights. The choice is no longer binary. Above all else, the voters in America are pragmatic.

The same is true for India. The 2024 India voting reflected the discontent among ordinary voters, where the economy superseded everything else. The conservative argument of caste or religious lines shaping voting patterns is increasingly becoming redundant. 

As it has long been said, democracy is a luxury when there is not enough food on the table. But there are also similarities between the out-of-touch ‘Khan market gang’ in India and America’s coastal elite. Instead of focusing on the real issue of voter pain, the Democrats’ and the Indian Opposition’s patronising tone of ‘How could you vote for him?’ reeked of moral superiority borne out of privilege, not realism.

Only Betting Markets Got It Right  

The media and the pollsters have got it so far wrong that they are in danger of losing their voice. These echo chambers are now functioning as cheerleaders of political thought. They dole out a narrative rather than acting as arbiters of reason. It is ironic that the most truthful picture came from sources that are often the most tainted in history—the betting markets in the US and the satta bazaar in India. Whether Trump’s sweep or the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) underperformance, they were the only ones who got it right.

Kamala Played Well

Kamala Harris also emerged as a hero to many. Clearly, many things that were out of her control went wrong for her: Biden’s selfishness in holding on to power, the war fatigue, and the all-important anti-incumbency. 

When my 10-year-old daughter accompanying me to the voting booth asked me why a woman gets passed yet again for the most powerful job in the world, I told her to walk tall the next day. Because in the shortest presidential campaign in American history, of only 107 days, Kamala managed to achieve the impossible and did better than any reasonable hope. LOTUS for POTUS simply did not have enough time to bloom.

I do not think America acted like it did in 2016 and chose to vote against a female President. The pain threshold that Trump pressed on was much lower on Maslow’s needs chart for the gender ceiling in American politics to even be a conversation. A famous meme from the Kamala campaign was a father going with his daughter to the polling booth and saying he was voting for her. I believe the father did still vote for his daughter, not necessarily as a mark of support for the candidate but as an act of hope of providing his family with a better life.

Trump Needs A Hail Mary 

But will Trump be able to deliver on that hope? In the America of the 1980s, the Republican party’s modern hero, Ronald Reagan, achieved the impossible as he took on the structural inflation problem, giving birth to decades of prosperity.

For Trump to leave the legacy he wants, he will have to be in offensive tackle mode for the next four years and deliver a magical Reaganesque solution to the working class pain. Or else, given the musical chairs game global politics has become, the Dems will be back in the White House in 2028.

(Namrata Brar is an Indian-American journalist, investigative reporter, and news anchor. She is the former US bureau chief of NDTV)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the authors

All of us can be forgiven for mistaking 2024 as the year of the longest-running live TV entertainment. Thankfully, one leg of it is over. As the votes get counted, the world can take a breather while regrouping and replenishing supplies for the second. The race to become the President of the United States has never been so absurd for the onlookers. Who or what, for example, was anyone rooting for?

According to a Pew Research Centre survey conducted in September, 69% of Americans admitted to following news about the presidential candidates for the 2024 election very (28%) or fairly (40%) closely. But what exactly were they getting or hoping to get? The survey report says, “Americans most often see news about actions on the presidential campaign trail, though they are most interested in their stances on issues”. A fair ask. Obviously unmet. 

Circus Of The Absurd

What the American voter has received so far is a concept of a plan from Trump and a promised continuum of Biden’s ‘problematic’ policies from Harris. Many Americans are sitting this election out, and who can blame them? A campaign trail inundated with descriptions of a golfer’s penis or how immigrants are eating other people’s animals, insinuations about a potential election steal on one side and an undressed stream-of-consciousness word salad on the other, has done little to convince the average American voter about the nobility and grandiosity of the White House. 

Both Trump and Harris have demonstrated an utter inability to learn from the past. While Trump got too bored of a decent, non-dramatic campaign just a few months into 2024 and unleashed his 2020 MAGA-man energy, Harris stubbornly refused to bring any course correction in her agenda on foreign policy issues despite her fellow Democrats’ public castigation. This election has been the most extensive testimony of what a lot of analysts within the US, as well as outside, have observed but have largely refrained from verbalising: both the Democrats and the Republicans fashion their electoral campaigns around the faults of the other side while doing absolutely nothing about their own. 

Kamala, The Saner One

Is it not ridiculous that the Harris campaign posited her only as the saner alternative to Trump? The fact that the Democrat incumbency became a burden and not a bolster for Harris should alert us that the new president’s arrival in the White House will probably be an extension of all the gaffes this campaign saw. And what about the process of candidate selection for both parties? Declaring Trump as their candidate for the third time, the Republican Party demonstrated an utter lack of imagination at a time when President Biden’s popularity was ebbing steadily. The Democrats changed their candidate from Biden to Harris with almost nil deliberations in their convention. The working-class voters, cold about Biden, have stayed cold towards her as well throughout the campaign.

But the US presidential elections are not about the American voters alone. What happens on Capitol Hill reverberates throughout the world. When Barack Obama won his first term, the symbolism of this victory was evident from young and old Indians celebrating at the India Gate in New Delhi. Presidents come and go, but their road to the Capitol paves ways across the world for ideologies, ideas, and geopolitical ramifications.

Nobody Knows Anything

From formulating trade controls to funding wars, what the POTUS decides goes a long way for the US and the rest of the world. Both Trump and Harris turned serious policy issues into farce during the campaign by sharpening the focus only on each other’s personalities. We still do not know what Trump’s plan is for the Middle East or the Russia-Ukraine war. Or China. Or Sudan or Bangladesh, for that matter. We only know that Harris is “committed to peace”, but her party’s ongoing actions have suggested otherwise. 

At this moment, it is an exercise in futility to assess what a Trump or a Harris win might mean for India or the larger Global South. There are no guiding principles to launch any such enquiry. Any scenario study will yield only fallacious conclusions because, simply, neither Trump nor Harris has stuck to either the party line or even their own stated beliefs. Trump’s transactionalism and Harris’s hubris are enough to defy any projections.

The US presidential election was once a lesson in how democracy asserts itself. In 2024, it has become something else. 

A glorified version of Hulk Hogan wrestling with his shirt.

(Nishtha Gautam is a Delhi-based author and academic.)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

Days to go for the most high-profile election in the universe. As the two candidates enter the final lap of campaigning, the messaging has decidedly gone off-colour. The Kamala Harris campaign recently ran a commercial on Snapchat and Instagram, scripted around the love life of black voters. In the commercial, depicting a speed dating scenario, a man is seen approaching a group of women holding balloons. The young ladies enquire about the man’s job, his finances, and his height. They react positively to all his answers. Then they ask him the crucial question: does he plan to vote? He responds, “Nah, not my thing”! The ladies are not impressed and they all pop their balloons, indicating it is a deal-breaker. The commercial generated backlash, with commentators saying it dehumanised and belittled the black community.  

The Donald Trump campaign also ran into a controversy because of sexually implicit messaging used in a speech. Shocker. The former US president, now seeking a second term, talked about legendary golfer Arnold Palmer. Nothing wrong with that, you would say. Except that, of all things, he was discussing the size of Palmer’s genitalia. This could have been a part of what is being called Trump’s ‘bro whispering campaign’; a swaggering, alpha-male, no-holds-barred style to reach out to men between the ages of 18-30 years. In 2018, he called a former key White House aide of his a “dog” and a “crazed, crying lowlife”. In this campaign, he referred to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, as “mentally impaired”.  

Crude messaging and the erosion of decent political discourse has now become a global trend. Ad hominem attacks, targeting the person instead of ideas or policies, is becoming the norm. Racist remarks and misogynistic statements are rampant.  

“We Do Not Want To Become A Mixed Race”

In 2022, Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s comment was straight out of the Nazi playbook when he said, “We are not a mixed race… and we do not want to become a mixed race”. Former President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, on hearing about a journalist’s death in 2016, blurted, “Just because you’re a journalist you are not exempted from assassination, if you’re a son of a bitch”. In 2017, Brazil’s former President Jair Bolsonaro, crossed the line, “I’ve got five kids but on the fifth I had a moment of weakness and it came out a woman”.

President of Poland, Andrzej Duda, has called LGBTQ rights an ideology more destructive than communism. Former United Kingdom Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, in one of his columns, wrote that women wearing the burqa looked like letter boxes or bank robbers. In 2021, former Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan said, “If a woman is wearing very few clothes, it will have an impact on men unless they’re robots. It’s common sense.”  

There are countless examples in India. Last year, an MP from the ruling dispensation used communal slurs on the floor of Parliament. The Home Minister, in 2018, termed illegal immigrants as ‘termites’. And we remember Prime Minister Modi, with his catcalls of “Didi, O Didi” aimed at West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, during the 2021 assembly elections. Misogyny lost.  

Social Media Has Made Us Less Empathetic

One of the significant factors contributing to the lowering of political discourse has been the rise of social media. While it has provided a convenient outlet for people to share their thoughts, these platforms can also foster echo chambers, where individuals are primarily exposed to ideas that align with their own. This can lead to a lack, or limited understanding, of alternative viewpoints. It leads to a decline in empathy and ‘otherisation’ of opponents, as well as an increased willingness to engage in personal attacks and harassment. Legacy media has also played a part, by prioritising sensationalism and opinion, instead of fact-based reporting.  

Would it be fair to say that this is a recent phenomenon in politics? Not by a long shot. In 1931, Winston Churchill described Mahatma Gandhi as a “seditious, half-naked fakir”. In the nineteenth century, an American President was vilified as a “liar”, “despot”, “usurper”, “thief”, “ignoramus”, “swindler”, “fiend”, “buffoon”, “butcher”, and a “devil”. Even Abraham Lincoln was not spared.  

(Additional research: Ayashman Dey)

(Derek O’Brien, MP, leads the Trinamool Congress in the Rajya Sabha)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

“We did it, Joe,” exclaimed the 49th Vice-President of the United States four years ago-the phrase becoming a war cry of sorts, coming from a half-Black, half-Indian woman, married to a Jewish-American man. This moment became a landmark in the sociopolitical history of the US. For all its celebratory moments, American democracy has a long way to go in terms of representation and inclusivity. When it comes to women, the gender schemas work as effectively in the oldest democracy of the world as it does in the emergent ones to keep women away from the high table. 

Can Kamala Harris be successful in the Holy Grail pursuit of occupying the Oval Office? The odds are stacked against her, starting from the delayed announcement of her candidature. With less than a month to go for the Democratic convention to secure her name on the ticket, Harris has a mountain to climb. The funding numbers are encouraging but the money can go only thus far in attitudinal and ideological battles. 

Women And Politics

To begin with, there is a problem with the recall. Studies (J Hitchon & C Chang, 1995) have revealed that voters recall women candidates in terms of their family and appearance and their men counterparts in terms of campaign activities. Harris understands that and has made this tendency work for her by highlighting her family background. However, in a deeply polarised American society which is in the throes of backlash against diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), this strategy may not work as desired any longer. 

Also Read | Indian Americans In Offices Not Reflective Of Their Population: Kamala Harris

American women have been consistently voting at a higher rate than men for more than four decades now. They are certainly not less political than men. Yet, even they are not sending enough women to political offices. Women candidates continue to get penalised for expressing emotions, particularly anger. Harris has been trying to keep her ‘anger’ in check, often descending into banalities in her public speeches. She has become a constant fodder for the meme factory. Whether this is a carefully crafted strategy, only time will tell.   

“Too Coloured”, “Not Coloured Enough”

Harris was only the second Black woman elected to the US Senate in the history of the country. This tells the world something that the Americans cannot be proud of. “The most disrespected person in America is the Black woman. The most unprotected person in America is the Black woman. The most neglected person in America is the Black woman,” said Malcolm X in 1962. Per some critical indices like education, healthcare, wages et al, the observation holds even today. Harris has come a long way jumping over fiery hoops of racial and gender discrimination. Her win in the presidential polls will be a bigger moment than Barack Obama’s presidency in terms of America’s race issue. A decade after the ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement first made its appearance on social media, American society continues to struggle to find the golden equilibrium. The anti-DEI rabble-rousers have now found effective means to punish individuals and institutions that do not toe supremacist lines.

Watch | “She’s Experienced, Tough, Capable”: Joe Biden Praises Kamala Harris

But Harris is not just Black, she’s also half-Indian and the country celebrated her from New Delhi to Chennai as its prodigal daughter. With a steadily growing population in the US over the years, Indians have emerged as a group with political aspirations. Indian community’s cultural, regional and religious associations have played an important role in increasing the political heft of Indian Americans. The flip side of this is the growing resentment among the fraudulently so-called originals-the Whites-against powerful immigrant communities. Ironically, even Black Americans harbour some resentment against immigrant communities that have reached the upper rungs of the socio-economic ladder. While this is sociologically ‘natural’, people like Harris are peculiarly affected. She’s coloured but not adequately so for some.

A Course-Correction Too Late

2024 is no 2018, when a surge for Democrats in general and women candidates in particular, sent Democratic women politicians of different ethnicities like Debra Haaland and Sharice Davids (Native American); Ayanna Pressley and Jahana Hayes (Women of Colour); Veronica Escobar, Sylvia R. Garcia, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (Latinas) to the Congress. The Republican campaign is bolstered by many a foreign policy faux pas of the Biden administration, the most important one being its role in the Israel-Palestine conflict. Even the captive Democratic voter is expressing dissent. The assassination attempt on Donald Trump has catapulted his already strong chances. 

Choosing Harris over Biden is a tactical course-correction for Democrats, but it may have come a bit too late in the day. Her strengths may not get optimised, her weaknesses are for all to see. As her V-P tenure goes, she has all the blame to carry but no benefits to reap.

Harris has the unenviable position of being the woman who cleans up after a man. If she emerges triumphant, it will be her personal victory, not that of the party. 

(Nishtha Gautam is a Delhi-based author and academic.)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author