Home
By Robert A. Vella – June 1st 2024
 
Contrary to typical Mainstream Media narratives (which are self-serving, not objective), a recent on-line CNN questionnaire revealed that Americans DO feel better-off today than they did at the end of the Trump presidency (see:  We asked readers whether they are better off in 2024. Here’s what they said) although they still have serious concerns about certain issues (e.g.  inflation, economic opportunity, and immigration).  The questionnaire was not comprehensive, but it was somewhat representative of the immediate concerns facing Americans ahead of the critical 2024 presidential election between incumbent Joe Biden and challenger Donald Trump who is now a convicted felon (the first for a former U.S. president, see:  Trump found guilty in hush money trial).  Respondents were allowed to post comments.  Here’s mine:
 
“Most of the larger societal metrics have definitely improved since Joe Biden became president and people do feel it.  However, Americans also sense the darkening clouds of political and cultural polarization, wealth inequality, and climate change too.  These are increasing deeper uneasiness about the future especially concerning democracy, freedom, domestic and international peace, and the stability of modern civilization.  It is analogous to living in a cave with plenty of supplies but needing to continually reinforce the entrance barrier against worsening storms.”
 
Considering the autocratic threat Trump poses to American democracy and its constitutional rule-of-law, the white supremacist and Christian nationalist threats right-wing Republican officials pose to America’s hard-won civil rights protections (e.g. voting equality and reproductive freedom), the threat rising authoritarianism poses to international relations, the existential threat climate change poses to human civilization, and the threat posed by growing populist distrust of our global socioeconomic system (which enables vulture capitalism and triggers mass migration), it’s no wonder that Americans worry so despite the obvious improvement in their personal lives over the last 3+ years.
 
Here are some examples of such news reports which have recently made the headlines:

The anti-democratic threat

 
The latest example is a video posted on the ex-president’s social media account that features a fake headline implying the US could become a “unified Reich” if he wins a second term in November. The video replicates what appears to be World War I-era newspapers. But the term “Reich,” which means a kind of empire, is also synonymous with the later Third Reich of Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany. The presumptive GOP nominee’s campaign insisted the sharing of the third-party video on Monday was the work of a staffer and not Trump, who was in court. It was eventually taken down hours later on Tuesday.
 
Trump may not have not been responsible for the post. But campaigns reflect the character of the candidate. And Trump has been flirting with Nazi imagery and giving comfort to far-right extremists for years. He recently accused President Joe Biden of running a “Gestapo” administration. Trump has several times warned immigrants are “poisoning the blood” of the United States, echoing language used by Hitler in his manifesto “Mein Kampf,” which the ex-president claims he hasn’t read. Back in 2017, Trump equivocated about condemning a White supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in which marchers chanted “Jews will not replace us.”

The white supremacist threat

(note: the conservative majority opinion in this case disingenuously asserted that racism masquerading as political partisanship doesn’t violate the law)

 
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday handed a victory to South Carolina Republicans, ruling against a challenge to an electoral map they devised that moved 30,000 Black residents out of a congressional district.
 
The justices reversed a lower court’s ruling that the Republican-drawn map violated the rights of Black voters under the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which guarantee equal protection under the law.
 
[…]
 
A federal three-judge panel in January 2023 ruled that the map unlawfully sorted voters by race and deliberately split up Black neighborhoods in Charleston County in a “stark racial gerrymander.”
 
Gerrymandering is a practice involving the manipulation of the geographical boundaries of electoral districts to marginalize a certain set of voters and increase the influence of others. In this case, the state legislature was accused of racial gerrymandering to reduce the influence of Black voters, who tend to favor Democratic candidates.
 
More on Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito who wrote the majority opinion in that case, from:  Opinion: Alito’s second red flag
 
This is not the first time Alito has found himself in hot water over displaying a controversial flag on his property. The New York Times reported last week that an American flag was flown upside down outside Alito’s Virginia residence on January 17, 2021, days before President Joe Biden’s inauguration. The upside-down flag, a signal of distress, was adopted by Trump supporters who believed the false claim that the election had been stolen. (Alito said his wife had raised the upside-down flag in response to a disagreement with a neighbor. He did not respond to a request for comment regarding the “Appeal to Heaven” flag.)
 
“The flags raise questions about just how publicly Alito is willing to express his political opinions and how those might influence his legal decisions. The discovery also comes at a time when the Supreme Court will be making a decision about Trump’s claims of sweeping presidential immunity, his get-out-of-jail-free card for the federal cases he faces. It also is considering a case challenging prosecutors’ use of an obstruction law against people arrested on January 6,” wrote Julian Zelizer. 
 
“The notion that the Supreme Court can be trusted to be an arbiter above partisan politics has suffered major blows in recent years. The politicization of the Senate confirmation process that has been taking place since the 1960s has gradually made it more difficult for citizens to see the justices as nonpolitical figures,” he added.

The Christian nationalist threat

 
Under the law, which took effect with the governor’s signature, it is now a crime to possess the abortion medication without a prescription, as well as to give the drugs to a person without their consent.
 
While proponents of the legislation say that it will protect expectant mothers, hundreds of health care providers in the state have come out against the reclassification, warning that it could create false perceptions around the medications’ safety and prevent people from accessing necessary care. While abortion is already banned in Louisiana with no exceptions for rape or incest, mifepristone and misopristol have other medical uses, including miscarriage care.

The global authoritarian threat

 
Authoritarians in every region are working together to consolidate power and accelerate their attacks on democracy and human rights, according to Freedom in the World 2022: The Global Expansion of Authoritarian Rule. Political rights and civil liberties have declined worldwide for each of the past 16 years, raising the prospect that autocracy could overtake democracy as the governance model guiding international standards of behavior.
 
Checks on abuse of power and human rights violations have eroded within nations and international organizations alike, dealing a serious blow to democracy’s foundations and reputation. Authoritarian regimes in China, Russia, and elsewhere have gained greater power in the international system, and freer countries have seen their established democratic norms challenged and fractured. The military coup in Myanmar and the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan ended fragile experiments in elected civilian rule and led to the steepest country declines for the year, with a dramatic 19-point drop in Myanmar’s score on the report’s 100-point scale, and a similarly alarming 17-point loss for Afghanistan.
 
A total of 60 countries suffered declines in political rights and civil liberties over the past year, while only 25 improved. Fewer countries experienced net improvements in 2021 than in any other year since the current period of global democratic decline began. As of today, some 38 percent of the world’s people live in countries rated Not Free, the highest proportion since 1997. Only two in 10 people live in Free countries.
 
 
WASHINGTON (AP) — A U.N. court’s order that Israel halt its offensive in the southern Gaza city of Rafah has deepened a disconnect with the United States over a military operation that faces mounting international condemnation but that American officials describe, at least for now, as limited and targeted.
 
The decision Friday by the International Court of Justice in The Hague adds to the pressure facing an increasingly isolated Israel, coming just days after Norway, Ireland and Spain said they would recognize a Palestinian state, and the chief prosecutor of a separate international court sought arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as well as leaders of Hamas.
 
[…]
 
… Palestinians still trapped in Rafah — the southernmost part of the Gaza Strip on the border with Egypt, and the site of a critical crossing for aid. More than 1 million people sought refuge there in recent months after escaping fighting elsewhere but some 900,000 have since fled the city.
 
Israel has brought hundreds of trucks in through the other main border crossing, Kerem Shalom, but the U.N. and aid groups say Israeli military operations make it dangerous for them to pick up food, water and other supplies for starving Palestinians.
 
The U.S. Agency for International Development says Gaza requires a steady flow of 600 trucks a day of food and other aid to reverse the onset of what the heads of USAID and the U.N. World Food Program call famine in the north and to keep it from spreading to the south.
 

The climate change threat

 
Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg sounded the alarm bell on climate change, warning that it is already affecting modes of transit.
 
“The reality is, the effects of climate change are already upon us in terms of our transportation,” Buttigieg said in an interview that aired on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on Sunday.
 
“We’ve seen that in the form of everything from heat waves that shouldn’t statistically even be possible, threatening to melt the cables of transit systems in the Pacific Northwest, to hurricane seasons becoming more and more extreme and indications that turbulence is up by about 15 percent. That means assessing anything and everything that we can do about it,” he added.
 
Buttigieg’s comments come days after a passenger on a Singapore Airlines flight died and dozens more were injured after the plane hit severe turbulence last week. He explained that while incidents like that are “rare,” the U.S. still needs to prepare to adapt to the changing climate.
 
 
In April, the European Court of Human Rights ruled in favor of a group of seniors who alleged that the Swiss government’s failure to meet climate change mitigation targets is having an adverse impact on their health, well-being and quality of life.
 
This landmark decision by the highest human rights court in Europe confirms not only that climate change is intimately linked to human rights, but effectively holds all European governments accountable to adopt more rigorous measures to combat climate change.

The threat of globalization and the populist reaction to it

 
What went wrong for Red Lobster, the chain that effectively introduced the concept of affordable seafood and kitschy coastal aesthetic to landlubbers across the Midwest and beyond?
 
First, Red Lobster got screwed by private equity. Then, it got screwed by its own managers.
 
Back in 2014, the Darden restaurant group spun off Red Lobster to a private equity firm. To finance the deal, that PE firm sold off most of Red Lobster’s property assets and then leased them back to the restaurants. But, as we learned in the bankruptcy filing, the vast majority of those restaurants were being charged rent at above market rates.
 
That cash drain might have been manageable under normal circumstances. But then 2020 came.
 
Red Lobster was hit with “financial and operational challenges” — namely, the one-two punch of the pandemic and the price inflation it set off, followed by the bone-headed strategic blunders that left the restaurant with $1 billion in debt and less than $30 million in cash on hand.
 
 
 
Globally, approximately 184 million people, or 2.3% of the world population, live outside their country of citizenship. This highlights the growing complexity of human mobility, which will increasingly be driven by factors like climate change, conflict, divergent demographic trends, and income inequality. These forces are not only pushing more people to relocate for better opportunities but also presenting growing challenges and opportunities for migration policy across various levels of development in the decades to come.
 
The debate over migration policy is often polarized and contentious. While empirical studies show positive impacts of migration on labor markets, business performance, and health outcomes in host countries, public opinion often views immigration with apprehension and fear.
 
While destination countries grapple with the trade-offs of hosting migrants, origin countries face challenges such as brain drain and education system costs. With migration expected to increase, effective policy-making is crucial in both origin and destination countries.
 
Keeping those societal circumstances (which produce highly complex and varying social dynamics) in mind, let’s examine ten important electoral factors which will likely determine the outcome of the 2024 presidential election in the U.S. (note:  these factors are extremely difficult to quantify and that is why, among other reasons, public opinion polls have become so unreliable since the 2016 general elections in which populist discontent upset conventional expectations):
 
  1. Swing voters who won’t support incumbents when they have “lost faith” (for whatever reason) in that political party, in a particular leader or officeholder, or in the system itself
  2. Republicans (e.g. Nicky Haley supporters) who won’t vote for Trump because of his corrupt and anti-democratic behavior or for his general unfitness for office
  3. Republicans who won’t vote for Trump because he was criminally convicted of felonies
  4. Women who won’t vote for Republicans because of the party’s activist opposition to abortion and other reproductive healthcare services
  5. Blacks who won’t vote for Biden because of dissatisfaction over ongoing economic inequality
  6. Latinos (particularly in Florida) who won’t vote for Biden because of their strong social conservatism
  7. Young people who won’t vote for Biden because of U.S. support of Israel’s (led by Benjamin Netanyahu) mistreatment of Palestinians in Gaza
  8. Biden’s need to win swing states (esp. WI, MI, PA) and win the popular vote by more than a slim majority because of the undemocratic Electoral College
  9. Racial gerrymandering in Red states (enabled by the U.S. Supreme Court) that disenfranchises minority groups which typically favor Democratic candidates
  10. Biden’s ability to consolidate wide support near the end of a campaign (e.g. the 2020 SC primary) even though he is not the first choice among many voters (esp. progressives)
As you can plainly see, the list is heavily weighted towards factors which describe voter pessimism and opposition rather than optimistic voter support.  This is indicative of the intense polarized and distrustful environment America (and many other countries too) are experiencing today.  Gone are the days when Americans overwhelmingly and hopefully elected Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1932, Lyndon Baines Johnson in 1964, Ronald Reagan in 1984, or even Barack Obama in 2008.  The nation is currently much too divided for such landslide elections.  Now, roughly 40% of the electorate is locked in for the Democratic presidential candidate (whomever that might be), another 40% for the Republican candidate, with the remaining 20% being pushed and pulled by these conflicting factors (and more) as they either try to choose who to vote for or whether they should even try to vote at all.
 
This is not the sign of a healthy democracy.
 
For Joe Biden, it is imperative that he hold together the broad coalition which elected him in 2020.  Unfortunately, accomplishing that will likely be more difficult in 2024.  While he appears to be holding onto moderates and centrists (including a significant number of Republicans), support among the liberal and progressive Democratic Party base appears to be wavering.  Remember that because of the Electoral College, Biden needs to defeat Donald Trump by more than a 3-4% margin in the popular vote (his margin of victory in 2020 was 4.5%, about 7 million votes) and that he probably needs to win all three of the Rust Belt swing states (Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania).
 
For Trump, his numerical path to victory is easier.  He won the presidency in 2016 even though he lost the popular vote to Democrat Hillary Clinton by 2%, nearly 3 million votes.  He only needs to unify the Republican Party behind him because Biden appears to be losing support among voters who typically support Democratic candidates.  However, that won’t be an easy task either because Trump has alienated (and continues to alienate) many Republican voters with his autocratic and criminal behavior.
 
Surprisingly, reliable “likely” voters have shifted towards Democrats since the 2018 midterms after decades of favoring Republicans.  Now, these moderates and centrists favor Democratic candidates more while low turnout anti-establishment voters are swinging towards Trump after decades of favoring Democrats.  The traditional partisan makeup of the American electorate has apparently changed.  What hasn’t changed, however, is the general perception of Democratic and Republican presidential candidates.  The criticism of Biden as a “weak” leader has long been hurled at previous Democratic candidates for president (with the obvious exceptions of FDR and LBJ).  The criticism of Trump as a “megalomaniacal” authoritarian is a justly deserved elaboration of the prevailing view of Republican candidates (since the 1960s) as dangerously eager to wield political and military power.  In contrast, the perception of Biden definitely hurts him among his Democratic base whereas the perception of Trump definitely helps him among his fanatical supporters.
 
Considering all these complex and evolving factors and dynamics, it is not possible to credibly forecast the 2024 election outcome.  What is more predictable is envisioning what Trump would do if he is elected again.  Based on what he did during his first term (e.g. illegally attempting to coerce federal and state Republican officials to overturn the legitimate 2020 election result, and inciting a violent insurrection of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021), and based on what he has said he would do in a second term (e.g. becoming dictator on day-1 and consolidating the power of the federal legislative and judicial branches under his control within the executive branch), what Trump would do couldn’t be more clear.  The U.S. Constitution would be destroyed and, along with it, democracy and the rule of law.  Trump intends to become dictator, and both the U.S. Congress and the federal judiciary would be subordinated under his authority.  The civil rights guaranteed to all Americans by the Bill of Rights would cease to exist.  White supremacy would be reenacted, Christian fundamentalism would supplant secularism and freedom of religion (with dire consequences for nonconformists), corporatism would further morph into fascism, and – above all – sworn fealty to Donald Trump would supersede all other duties, oaths, and responsibilities.
 
If successful, Trump would move to punish, incarcerate, or eliminate all of his perceived domestic enemies.  Once he achieved that to his statisfaction, Trump would target perceived foreign enemies which would include military threats and eventually attacks and invasions.  As his power grew, so would his lust for more power… until the world would finally rise up against Trump or some global catastrophe stopped him (and maybe all of us too) permanently.  If Trump would happen to die prematurely, one of his henchmen would take his place.
 
Do you think this is hyperbole?  Think again.  It has already happened before.  It CAN happen again.  Americans will own whatever choice they make.