Opinion | Shortcomings in US electoral system: Election, or combat?
By Zhou Dewu
November 5 marks the final voting day for the US presidential election. As of 9 am Eastern Time on Nov. 3, over 78 million voters had already cast their ballots early, resulting in an overall turnout exceeding 50%. However, the final outcome of the election largely depends on the overall turnout and the gender ratio of voters. This election is a contest between male and female candidates and a showdown between male and female voters. In a sense, the Democratic Party is becoming the "women's party," while the Republican Party is evolving into the "men's party." The Chinese phrase "Women can hold up half the sky" is particularly relevant in the context of the current US election.
This US election has been chaotic, exposing significant flaws in the American electoral system.
First, the primary election mechanism of the two major parties is problematic. The combined age of the candidates from the Democratic and Republican parties exceeds 160 years. These elderly candidates, who should be enjoying their twilight years, have chosen to "push their limits." Although younger Republican figures like DeSantis and Haley intended to challenge Trump, they ultimately fell short. Biden's poor performance during the first presidential debate on June 27 led Democratic leaders to "pressure" him to step aside, treating the primary voting process as a farce. While Democrats repeatedly blamed Trump for his unwillingness to concede power peacefully in January 2021, they themselves engaged in what many Republicans consider "anti-democratic" practices during the primaries, undoubtedly weakening the Democratic narrative of democracy.
Trump has accused the Democrats of manipulating the 2020 election. In October of that year, the FBI suppressed the laptop scandal involving Biden's son Hunter, citing Russian interference in the election. The anticipated October surprise failed to materialize, which incensed Trump and his supporters, further entrenching beliefs in election fraud and conspiracy theories.
Second, the election highlights significant loopholes in the US Constitution. The Founding Fathers were too simplistic in establishing the criteria for presidential candidates.
The fact that a figure like Trump, with a controversial past, can run for president is exceedingly rare in American history. It seems the Constitution's framers did not anticipate that the moral baseline for American voters could sink to such lows. The phenomenon of "bad money driving out good" is vividly illustrated in this election. Former First Lady Michelle Obama remarked in 2016 that while Trump pursued low standards, they must pursue high standards. Yet, eight years later, both parties have abandoned high standards, and personal attacks have intensified.
Trump has called Harris "stupid" and "dumb as a rock," referring to her as a "shit vice president." In turn, Harris has accused Trump of being self-centered and unserious, stating that the consequences of elevating such a person to the presidency are "extremely serious."
Third, this election has intensified the competition between the establishment, represented by the Democratic Party, and the anti-establishment factions. Compared to 2016, some establishment Republicans have rallied around Trump, but many remain firmly in the "Never Trump" camp. Notably, Barbara Bush, daughter of former Republican President George W. Bush, and Liz Cheney, daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, have publicly supported Harris. Trump's former allies have voiced their belief that he is unfit to return to the White House, arguing that his attention span is less than five minutes, and he behaves irresponsibly, showing minimal patience during briefings. However, Trump's supporters remain unfazed, firmly believing he can save America, highlighting American voters' division and distrust of the existing system.
Fourth, this election challenges the "wealth effect" theory. Many believe that a booming stock market equates to overall prosperity; however, the importance of sharing economic gains is even more critical. During the 2020 election, Trump claimed that the US stock market would implode if Biden were elected. When Biden was inaugurated on January 20, 2021, the Dow Jones Industrial Average stood at 30,000 points, soaring to over 42,000 points by November 3 of this year—a remarkable increase, with the stock market achieving historical highs during Biden's presidency. Statistics show that 58% of American households own stocks and other assets, and traditional theory suggests that a rising market would enhance the "wealth effect," leading to improved conditions for voters. Yet, the inflation rate has outpaced income growth, causing even the middle class to feel financial pressure. More importantly, 42% of households do not own stocks, missing market gains and facing even harsher economic realities.
Multiple polls indicate that two-thirds of Americans believe the economy under Biden is performing poorly, while only one-third feel it is doing well. Last week, at a rally in New York's Madison Square Garden, Trump asked his supporters, "Are you better off than you were four years ago?" The crowd resoundingly responded, "No!" In Trump's final year in office, the US government swiftly implemented a US$2 trillion emergency relief package in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. After Biden took office, he followed suit, leading to inflation rates peaking at 9.1%. Ultimately, the Federal Reserve had to take drastic measures, significantly raising interest rates, which had evident side effects.
As interest rates soared, mortgage rates followed suit, leading to widespread discontent among the public. This situation stems from Biden's economic policies and represents a heavy burden for Harris. How much this will affect her electoral prospects will soon be revealed.
However, one thing is certain: whether Harris or Trump takes office, the overall policy direction in the US will lean conservative, as evidenced by Harris's rightward shift in policies.
(Source: Ta Kung Pao)
Related News:
Opinion | Battle between genders: Who's worse in US presidential election?
Comment