After her triumphant anointment as the Democratic presidential candidate, Vice President Kamala Harris’s star has certainly risen. Her well-crafted and movingly-delivered acceptance speech, greeted with rousing applause, on the last day of the Democratic National Convention (DNC) last week, seems to have enthused and galvanised party cadres anew. I heard the speech, with its pitch to ordinary Americans, to accept Harris as an normal, friendly, and very nice person. It did humanise her and make her seem relatable as also render the United States less domineering or power-hungry to the world.
Her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, also comes across as an approachable and affable, almost avuncular neighbour, rather than the prospective Vice President of the republic. Given his record as school teacher, coach, and armed forces veteran, he complements Harris’ appeal among the Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and other minority groups. The entire DNC was a bit of a gender bender too, with its conscious foregrounding of DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) voices. Many more women were visible in the forefront as were people of colour. Also, widely represented were LGBTQ and other minorities. Certainly, the DNC represented a substantially different America than that of the Republicans led by former president Donald Trump and his running mate, Ohio senator J. D. Vance.
One might even think that this election is not just about politics, economics, race, and gender, but also a contest between masculinities. The Democratic male faces and voices seem to be consciously chosen from the testosterone disadvantaged, if not deprived, section of the male populace. The uncharitable would call them “unmanly” or wimpy. In contrast, in the Republican world, there is a return to the stronger American male stereotype.
But the biggest contest in this election is about two quite different ways of being American. The Trump-Vance ticket projects ideas of competence, initiative, entrepreneurship, and America’s continued dominance in the world — or, in a word, MAGA (Make America Great Again). The Harris-Walz campaign, on the other hand, is classically positioning itself as the soft-socialist, state interventionist, and pro-poor model of how America should be governed. The state is to take care of its citizens with the rich having to pay more for doing so.
Having listened to Barack Obama’s acceptance speech at the 2008 DNC, also held at Chicago, I cannot be make comparisons. This time there was tremendous enthusiasm for a woman of colour on the presidential ticket while in 2008 it was all about the US’s first would-be Black president. But I would have to admit that the Obama moment was pure magic while Harris’s return to the limelight was much more hype than hard facts. The refrain of “joy, joy, joy,” too, seemed somewhat made up given how badly ordinary Americans are suffering due to the price rise and economic hardships they face on a daily basis.
Listening to Harris, I couldn’t help thinking that her approach to the economy was deeply flawed and unconvincing. Worse, her view of the world and America’s role in it was simplistic to the point of being unimpressive. Overall, her entire performance was about “feelings over fundamentals.” But how far can feeling carry the voters along, I wondered.
Outside the DNC, there were protests and violent street crimes. Black Americans and Hispancs, too, weren’t happy with Harris for her role and position on opening the doors of America to illegal immigrants. It is the poorest citizens whose jobs are most vulnerable. Right in Chicago, for instance, African American women were complaining about how illegals were getting two-year’s rent free accommodation, free food, even free internet while they had to struggle to make ends meet.
One stunning feature of the ongoing fight for the presidency is the extent to which the media is biased in Harris’ favour. All the major networks, led by CNN, seem to be fighting for Harris free of charge — with the sole exception of Fox, which is clear in its support of Trump. In the social media space, the Democrats are much more media savvy. Again, with the sole exception of Elon Musk, who put out an AI-created video of Trump and him jiving to the Bee Gees’ hit, “Staying Alive”.
The attempted assassination of Trump, coming so soon after his crushing victory over President Joe Biden in their solo head-to-head debate, had put him in a commanding position. Now, that advantage has not only been shaved off but most polls show Harris with an average of a 2-point lead over Trump. Registered Democrats far outnumber Republicans. US elections are thus decided by unregistered and independent voters.
Of course, US pollsters have been proven wrong as have been our own in India. Hillary Clinton had a 12-point lead over Trump in 2016. I watched their last debate from a hotel in Manaus, the capital of the Amazonas estado or state of Amazon in Brazil. It was quite a surreal sense of being so remote and yet so near history in the making. Trump won, as we all know, proving everyone wrong.
Will history, after a hiccup, repeat itself?
In the last three US elections, the margins of victory were so slim that just a few hundred votes in key swing states and a few thousand votes on the national scale tilted the balance. In addition the controversies over “stolen” elections, election fraud, voters needing no ids to vote, and non-citizens allegedly voting, not to speak of foreign interference and other forms of sledging, have all cast their long shadows on the ongoing presidential contest.
Who will win in November? With less than 60 days to go, this question is on everyone’s mind. But one thing is clear: this is going to be a closely fought and decisive election, one of the most important in US history.
The writer is an author and columnist. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.