On June 27th, CNN’s Atlanta studio became the stage for an unprecedented event in American politics: the earliest presidential debate in history, featuring the oldest candidates ever to run for the highest office.
Joe Biden and Donald Trump, representing the Democratic and Republican parties, respectively, faced off months before the November election, setting a new precedent in the electoral calendar. The debate, devoid of the usual live audience and stripped of props or prewritten notes, allowed only a pen, a notepad, and a bottle of water for each candidate. This format, agreed upon after the chaotic 2020 debates, saw two CNN journalists moderating with the power to cut the microphone of any candidate who strayed too far from the question or engaged in excessive vitriol. This sanitized approach aimed to bring order and decorum back to the presidential debates.
Since their previous electoral clash, Biden and Trump have epitomized the deep-seated polarization in American society. While speculation occasionally surfaces about the emergence of other viable candidates from either major party, Biden and Trump have come to symbolize more than just personal rivalries. Their ongoing adversarial relationship highlights the profound divisions that extend well beyond individual animosities, encapsulating the broader societal rifts that define current American politics.
LOOMING QUESTIONS
Despite legal challenges hitherto unseen in U.S. electoral history, with charges ranging from misappropriation of campaign funds to insurrection during the January 2020 riots, Donald Trump remains broadly popular with the Republican base. As court rulings are unlikely to bar him from running in the election, he will be on the ballot in all states. As such, his team is focused on reducing the impact of court proceedings on undecided voters and on soft supporters that might sit the elections out.
Trump still hasn’t decided on his running mate. The pick will tell us a lot about his strategy. Whether he will look to strengthen his own base and choose someone who already endorses his positions (such as Senator J.D. Vance), or to broaden his appeal and choose someone who once challenged him (Governors Marco Rubio and Doug Burgum), or to try to make further inroads into demographics that largely don’t favor him (Elise Stefanik, Ben Carson), he needs to make a carefully measured decision.
In this game, the incumbent president usually plays defense, but Biden has a problem when it comes to addressing Trump’s charges that inflation has reached as much as 50% over the past four years
Biden has different issues. He needs to persuade voters that the economy is in good shape, that macroeconomic numbers are enough for a population that’s concerned about its purchasing power and rising prices. In this game, the incumbent president usually plays defense, but Biden has a problem when it comes to addressing Trump’s charges that inflation has reached as much as 50% over the past four years. The economy is the broad front that Biden must engage on fully and persuasively.
The other front is the one in Gaza, where continued Israeli attacks against Hamas combatants and Palestinian civilians have caused a stir in the U.S. public, despite staunch pro-Israel positions among the vast and bipartisan political majority. Americans of Palestinian origin, and many Arabs and Muslims, were strong Biden supporters in the 2020 elections and have been major contributors to his wins in key battleground states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. It’s practically impossible for Biden to win the election without also proving victorious in these states.
He has to manage U.S. involvement in Israel’s operations and in the broader Middle East region, while trying to preserve any favorability that he still has among these voters. June’s polls generally favored Trump slightly. He has a lead of one to five percentage points in national polls, while holding a slight lead in several battleground states. Due to the state-centric logic of presidential elections, a Democratic Party candidate usually needs to record a slightly more convincing win to get enough electoral votes. Over the last quarter of a century, a Democratic candidate has won more votes and still lost the election twice, in 2000 and 2016, when Trump defeated Hillary Clinton. Whatever the case, we are probably set for a razor-thin margin of victory.
SPILLOVER EFFECTS
While the world has some experience of a Trump presidency, unease remains regarding what his possible second term would bring. Kyiv and Beijing are probably the most concerned about the outcome.
Kyiv’s predicament is clear: it relies heavily on continued financial support and arms deliveries from the U.S. and European countries to defend itself against Russia. Trump has a Ukraine complex, with the U.S. House of Representatives having impeached him in 2019 for abuse of power in response to his attempt to withhold aid to Ukraine as a way of pressuring Kyiv to investigate Biden’s team. He has been touting his ‘deal-making’ abilities and claiming that, with him in the White House, Putin would have never invaded Ukraine. His hostility towards military aid to Ukraine is now well documented. Thus, Kyiv and European states worry that he would seek to cut some deal with Putin without considering Ukraine’s interests or European security. For Ukraine and Europe, Biden is a trusted and preferred choice. The EU is trying to ringfence its policies in support of Ukraine and is wary of possible trade wars with Trumps’s administration.
The other front is the one in Gaza, where continued Israeli attacks against Hamas combatants and Palestinian civilians have caused a stir in the U.S. public, despite staunch pro-Israel positions among the vast and bipartisan political majority
A trade war is the first thing on Beijing’s mind when it comes to the possibility of a change in Washington. And it’s not as though the Biden administration has been soft: it continued some Trump sanctions (like those on Huawei) and has issued far more radical measures to hurt China’s microchip industry. Beijing is concerned that the Republican Party is far more interested in waging a trade war against China than the Democrats. The ‘new Cold War’ between the U.S. and China is now seen as a reasonable idiom to explain the current state of affairs.
The coming election lacks new, creative and inclusive solutions that could have global appeal, rather seeming to be part of a prolonged domestic cultural struggle. For us, as bystanders and onlookers, this presidential election seems to be more about analyzing and managing possible negative effects than about raising hope.