HILLARY VERSUS TRUMP: IT WAS NEVER SO BAD

Mukesh Devrari 

When this author woke up in the morning and opened CNN, the first fifty minutes of Presidential debate in America was already over. He witnessed the ideological onslaught of Republic candidate by very healthy Democratic Party candidate Hillary Clinton in the remaining portion of the debate. Sitting here in this small city of Dehradun, he also felt like commenting on US elections. After all US President will also decide how India will look like in the future.

Democrats are good at making populist signals. In the first Presidential debate Hillary Clinton tried to make remarks in favour majority. She tried her best to appear as if her priority is ordinary Americans, not American corporate houses. So, as a most unpopular Presidential candidate from Democratic Party she threw her old net for catching American votes.

All her arguments can be summed up in a few lines. Throughout the debate, Hillary outlined working for the interests of the ordinary American public as her priority unlike the Republican nominee Donald Trump.

On race relations, she declared that better community relations are needed in the USA. Change in attitude towards African American and other folks of colour are required. On the security front, she argued for the status quo. There was nothing new about her foreign policy outlook. She justified US actions in Middle East and blamed trump for supporting the Iraq war more than a decade ago.

She basically repeated her statement that trump considers women inferior. He has no respect for women. He is a racist who has made racist remarks against women in the past. According to Hillary Trump supports gun laws and his attitude and policy preference are implicitly racist in character. If he becomes President, United States of America will no longer be the same.

Well, if an alien who has never visited planet earth comes here for the first time. He may conclude that Hillary Clinton is making more sense than Donald Trump. She is making right kind of noises. It’s feel-good stuff for most of us.

Unfortunately, those who are living here on this planet cannot see these debates in vacuum. The must be seen in the larger context.

After hilarious populist bombardment from Hillary, Trump made an interesting observation, “Typical politician, all talk, no action, sounds good but does not work.”   

Republican candidate Donald Trump has a different take on most of the issues raised in the debate. On economy, he declared a reduction in the corporate tax rate from 35 per cent to 15 per cent, measures to check 800 billion dollar trade deficit and controlling transfer of American jobs overseas. He also claimed that free trade agreements America has signed are hurting the American manufacturing industry. He will renegotiate them. 

About race relations, he supported aggressive policing. It is an epiphany for aggressive police patrolling in African American neighbourhoods. He supported the idea that possible trouble makers must not have access to guns. But he fiercely protected the second amendment which ensures that every American can possess military-style firearms.

Killings of thousands of Americans in gun related violence did not deter him from forcefully pushing gun ownership rights of Americans.

Clinton’s attitude towards gun laws is also problematic. At least Trump has taken a side. He has made it clear that he wants people to have guns. Hillary tried to make the right kind of noises to convince or pull the population which favour tough gun-related laws, but she was talking about cosmetic changes. She did not demand considerable alteration in the existing gun laws to make gun ownership difficult. So she wants to make everyone happy and has no stand on the issue.

Trump was pretty clear on the economy. He is a proud businessman, lovers his empire. He is a self-convinced man. He claims that he runs a highly profitable and successful company. He has made wealth for himself and his family.

When Hillary alleges that he had not paid any taxes, applied for bankruptcy laws. Trump retorted, “I am a businessman and I used laws of the land for the benefit of his business. I did not do anything illegal.” What basically he was saying is “I earned money and used all tricks to maximize profit. I will do the same for America”.

Hillary dismisses his economic outlook. It will not work. These policies have failed in the past. She cites the 2008 financial crisis as proof. They are destined to fail in future. However, apart from rhetoric, she fails to come up with any viable alternative plan.

This election season American voters have a very difficult choice. None of the presidential candidates represents best of America. One is a businessman with a shady record on all issues. Another one has a terrible record as senator and secretary of state. The USA has seen a historical decline in stature under Democratic Party President Barack Obama and his secretary of state Hillary Clinton.

America needs change. However, it will never become great again.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL CIRCUS IN US AND INDIA

Indian readers who do not follow American elections can understand the difference between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party by comparing them with Indian mainstream political parties. This comparison is being made in the light of the presidential between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.  

Let me fix the linkages for you.

Hillary Clinton is targeting middle-class Americans. She talks about inclusive growth. Similarly, Congress talks about the common man and uses the same word inclusive growth during elections in India. This is the first similarity.

Hillary Clinton mentioned race discrimination. She lamented the fact that race determines a lot of things in the USA. The behaviour of police, judges, employers and whites towards their fellow citizens depend on the colour of their skin. Congress party in India plays similarly with the sentiments of suppressed classes. Congress raises the issues of discrimination against Dalits, minorities, Schedule Tribes and other suppressed social groups.

Republican candidate Donald Trump raised similar questions, which BJP raises against Congress. Trump thunders, “Why don't they do anything about it when they are in power? Why Democratic Party politicians raise these issues and talk about them only when elections approach?”

Congress and Democratic Party have so far failed in answering these questions satisfactorily. If Hillary Clinton has done anything for citizens of colour than she must share it with ordinary Americans. Otherwise, her concerns towards them will be considered not more than crocodile tears.

In American elections, security issues matter a lot. Trump has a pretty simple approach. He sees other states as potential business adversaries, not as military adversaries. He repeated on many occasions, “United States cannot act as a world policeman.” He is simply asking for reorienting American defense outlook.

His concepts are clear. If Saudi Arabia, Japan and South Korea want American military protection, then they must bear the cost. They must pay for it. These countries have lot of cash. Either they should have their own security apparatus to deal with prospective enemies or they should pay USA for military support.

USA is paying 78 percent of total NATO budget. Trump questions the wisdom of current policies. He questions the wisdom behind seeing Russia as potential enemy.

Here, Trump is more inward looking like Congress, which some extent understands that India is not a superpower. It’s nation with advanced political system but has a poor economy and terrible social systems.  

Hillary justifies status quo, which means American will continue to act overseas with impunity. BJP also seeks a role for India in other parts of the world.

Trump declares Hillary Clinton and Democratic Party responsible for the mess in the Middle East. He held her responsible for the rise of Islamic state.

WHO WON THE DEBATE?

It can be concluded that Hillary behaved more like an experienced politician. Donald Trump is new to this game.

Trump failed in properly outlining her failures. During her tenure as Secretary of State she compromised American strategic interests by using personal email account. She was in office when US ambassador was killed in Libya. Pakistan ensured Taliban remains kicking and alive in Afghanistan while collecting billions of dollars in aid from US in the name of fighting terrorists under her command. 

There are two more debates to go. Hillary Clinton tried her best to ensure support of Latino and African American voters. To counter her, Trump needs to widen his support base beyond white Americans. It is a difficult task amid high volume democratic party propaganda against him.

Democrats are trying to demonize Donald Trump. Once he comes to power. He will more moderate perhaps like Indian Prime Minister.

Recently Mark Azha, Cultural Affairs Secretary (not very highly ranked official), US Embassy, New Delhi visited Doon University. He was on a tour to North India. He talked to opinion leaders of various segments of society. He tried hard to convince his audience that no matter who wins the election US foreign policy will remain the same.

Perhaps the US diplomatic community is aware that Trump is likely to be elected as President of the United States. So they have already started fire fighting to deal with the adverse global reaction. 

We are all waiting for the second and third presidential debate. It is great to watch this political drama. How we would have lived without it.

(Author loves US politics.)