According to Xinhua News Agency, US Republican presidential candidate Trump announced his victory in the 2024 presidential election in the early hours of the 6th.

This election was once considered the most stalemate. Trump was in the lead from the beginning of the vote count until the final result was released. It was unexpected that it was so "clever". If we look at this election from the perspective of the US political cycle, there may not be so many entanglements. It is just because of Trump's personal reasons that the election process is full of "waves". Judging from the results, what does Trump's comeback mean? Why is it said that the Democratic Party and Harris' team lost the election due to mistakes in election strategy... Regarding these issues, Red Star News invited two experts to interpret them.

'Double Edge' Reversing Roles Through Elections?

Trump’s comeback means that Trump’s “Trumpism” will come to the fore again.

The reason for saying this is: First, Biden’s four-year term and Harris’ defeat this time can be regarded as “episodes” of “Trumpism”. Biden and the Democratic Party have not reversed the direction of American social thought; second, Harris also “secretly” accepted many “Trumpist” propositions during the campaign. Even if Harris comes to power, she will probably partially accept “Trumpism”; third, Trump did not withdraw from the political stage after his defeat in 2020, but “reshaped” the Republican Party. Trump’s declaration of victory this time further proves the tenacity of “Trumpism”.

"Trumpism" represents the return of American conservatism. Of course, because of Trump's "shocking" words and deeds, the conservative ideas behind "Trumpism" have some unruly personal characteristics. Trump won the election like a "dark horse" in 2016, and the series of measures he took, including restricting immigration, building a wall, and reducing taxes, reflected the voice of American society, catering to and awakening the submerged marginal voices.

When some people think that Trump is an "outlier" among American presidents, especially after losing the election in 2020, Trump's "shock" may be over. But this is not the case. Some political scientists, polling agencies, think tanks, etc. seem to only understand half of the United States and regard the other United States as "others", which is why many people call the United States of America "the divided United States of America".

In contrast, some investigative journalists, sociologists, and anthropologists seem to understand the United States better than political scientists and economists. In recent years, the United States has published a series of books on the various aspects of American society, presenting "The Elegy of the Country People", "The Sinking Era", "The Bottom of Fracking", "Small Town America", etc. These voices are difficult to reflect in the data of political science and economics. Even in this election, many polling agencies have adopted a "strategic ambiguity" policy to control the data within the error range, and the battleground states have become red states, which is hardly shown in these studies. It can be seen that American polling agencies and media must also go deep into the grassroots and change their working style.

Ultimately, the reason for the era of "Trumpism" is that 40 years of globalization has replicated the "center-periphery" structure in the United States. The east and west coasts of the United States have become the "dual centers" of the United States and the global system, while the red states that support Trump are mostly dual peripheries. Trump's return to the White House and the impact of "Trumpism" on the White House, Capitol Hill and the Supreme Court are the voices and thoughts of those on the "double periphery", trying to reverse their "double periphery" role through elections.

“Talk more about feelings and avoid talking about policies” is a big mistake?

As predicted by almost all analysts familiar with the US election, due to the obvious "dual split" phenomenon in American society in recent years, the distribution of voters is dumbbell-shaped, that is, there are many die-hard supporters of the two parties and their positions are very stable, while the number of swing voters is decreasing. In short, the US presidential election has become a "miniature plate" under the influence of various factors, and the truly valuable game is concentrated in the seven battleground states, especially the competition for Pennsylvania.

In fact, the Democratic Party and Harris' team did invest a lot of resources, time and energy in these seven "battlefields" at the last minute, but the results were not ideal. The fundamental reason for this may be that Harris and her "seniors" behind her - Pelosi and the Obamas chose the election strategy of "talking more about feelings and resolutely avoiding talking about policies and details".

The Democrats adopted this strategy, perhaps considering that as the current vice president, Harris would have to "take the blame" for the government's dismal performance in the economy and people's livelihood in the past four years, so they hoped to "avoid the real and attack the fake" and repeat the scene of Obama's victory. For this reason, after "replacing" Biden as the presidential candidate, Harris always tried her best to avoid talking about achievements, political platforms, and strategies. Instead, she spent more time on "abortion rights" that seemed to be beneficial to her side, such as Trump's criminal prosecution. Facts have proved that this may be the reason for the big mistake.

Statistics show that under the "most concerned issues in the election", "the state of democracy" and "economic issues" ranked first and second with 35% and 31% respectively, while the "priority" chosen by the Democratic Party and Harris' team at the last minute - abortion rights, received only 14% attention. Although Trump did not do well on the above "priority issues", he at least showed an attitude of "not avoiding" the issue, while Harris and the Democratic Party gave the American voters, especially the voters in the battleground states, a sense of alienation at a critical moment.

Candidates and campaign teams may not be able to come up with a "prescription" to deal with the current situation, save the country from difficulties, and overcome current problems, but they must not avoid even the actions and gestures of facing all of this. Harris and the Democratic Party's backwardness this time undoubtedly proves this point again.

Trump, who lost the election four years ago, chose not to admit defeat, which delayed the official announcement of the election results, and also led to the subsequent "storming of the Capitol" and a series of lawsuits, the sequelae of which continue to this day. In this election, the "binary opposition" sentiment is still obvious. Whether Harris and the Democratic Party can return to the convention of "acknowledging defeat" in the US election will also be a focus of great interest and attention for some time to come. #美国大选预测市场 #美国大选后涨或跌？