How Liberal Will US Voters Be?

• Prof. Purushottam Dahal

Despite decades of a democratic system, America, the world's second-largest democracy, has yet to elect a woman to the presidency. Now, Kamala Harris, born to an Indian mother, is running for the office. Will the American people, who are eager to educate the world about democracy and inclusion, find a woman running for president worthy against men? The response to this question is not straightforward.

Despite the upcoming elections, public areas remain tranquil. Campaign meetings are also held in predetermined locations. Some voters appear to have buried posters supporting politicians in their pockets. Except for signs with the name Harris next to modest dwellings and placards with the name Trump next to properties that resemble landlords, the media appears to bear all credit for the campaign. Public welfare initiatives have an equally significant influence. A single meeting receives more attention in the media than a face-to-face dispute. Because Trump is an experienced player, he tries to make the treatment of regular people seem spectacular.

Why voters do not seem liberal?
Eight years ago, the defeat of Hillary Clinton, the most prominent female contender at the time, revealed how American culture is not as liberal as it appears on the surface. Hillary had expertise as a member of Congress before becoming President Barack Obama's strong and prominent Secretary of State. She also served as the First Lady of the United States for eight years, married to then-President Bill Clinton. Hilary was the offspring of British American forebears, but Kamala Harris' circumstance differs. However, Kamala has much legal experience. Kamala has been in legal responsibility since 2004. Kamala has served in the Senate and as Vice President under Joe Biden, after previously serving as California's Attorney General.

Donald Trump, who defeated Hilary Clinton eight years ago, is running for president again. His slogan, "Make America Great Again", appears to be quite effective. It appears that his assertive presentation has enraged many Americans. Americans are understandably delighted by his harsh words and approach, particularly his opposition to illegal immigration. Trump has considerable experience satirizing the opposition. Kamala, who appears in a respectful and dignified manner, is also delivering sharp arguments in her presentation of thoughts. However, it is unlikely that the American electorate will grow more liberal and apathetic toward masculinity.

Two-party supremacy in American democracy
The American presidency, which is elected by the representative votes of over 340 million people, has been dominated by only two parties in recent years. Apart from the Congress and the Republican Party, no one believes that a third party exists. The practice of two-party democracy is widespread in America. Those who have witnessed this behavior argue that the model of the impoverished and emerging democracy is likewise two parties. This approach may be important to America, but claiming that an equivalent arrangement is acceptable for the rest of the world does not seem to be a valid argument.

The election's deadline is less than a week away. On November 5 (according to American time and calendar), the American people will pick their 47th president. The history that began with George Washington has now reached Joe Biden. Since the United States has had 46 male presidents and has yet to have a female president, the potential of Kamala being president is being heard and seen in the American news media, yet the daily predictions make supporters unhappy and delighted every day.

It appears that the American media is portraying the potential of a presidential election in such a manner that it overlooks the shifting face of stock purchasers' excitement and fear in the daily ups and downs of the market. Looking at the propaganda, it appears strange to seek fairness in undeveloped nations' media. The media freely presenting politicians' viewpoints and opposition in diverse ways is not a new phenomenon in America.

Financial influence on voters
I used to believe that votes were exclusively purchased and sold in developing nations. The term "developed democracies" refers to European countries, particularly those in Scandinavia. The elections in Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, the United Kingdom, and Germany are seen as exemplary. We have expected free, courageous, and greed-free voting since the inception of neo-democracy. Voters in poor nations like ours believe that attempting to influence the vote, directly or indirectly, should be outlawed, but this is happening. In an evolved and developed country like America, there should be no pressure on voters, but it does not appear unlikely.

Elon Musk, the affluent and intellectually rich man, is waging a campaign in swing states. One of the Republican lawmakers of each such state is giving away $1 million to a random winner. Only individuals who attended Trump's event and are Republicans will be eligible for the prize money. In the presidential election campaign, it is clear that this is an approach for indirectly influencing voters. Although the Democrats and some intellectuals have stated their opposition to this effort, it has not been halted; nonetheless, it has not been demonstrated in this instance that a court case must be pursued as early as possible.

Disputes over foreign manipulation
This article also discusses foreign forces that have direct influence over voters. Russia, China, and the Arab community will be heavily discussed. There are allegations that Russia supports Trump and that Britain's Labour Party supports Democrats. The candidates' and opponents' propaganda arguments are as follows. At the period of the Democratic Party's rule, Ukraine is at war with Russia, and Israel is at war with Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, and Iran. The American interest in the merits and disadvantages of these conflicts is obvious.

As a result, it is projected that around 2% of Jews in America will vote for Kamala, while Arab Americans are expected to vote for Trump, however this estimate may be incorrect owing to recent developments.

Trump has recently expressed extremely severe sentiments about Islamic fundamentalists. It has been reported that he backed Israel against Iran a few days ago. The Democratic Party's leadership cautioned Israel not to take any action against Iran's key sites, particularly its oil riches and nuclear installations. Following the event in which Iran launched over 80 missiles at Israel and impacted Tel Aviv, the two political parties of the United States, had differing opinions. The Americans are now assaulting the Israeli Prime Minister, using the Iranian statement.

Especially, despite losing the 2020 presidential election, Trump does not appear to have suffered loss thus far. After losing to Biden, the effort to take over the US Parliament still remains in the imaginations of Americans. Since Trump's election speech, the aggression of his campaign has plainly demonstrated his desire for administration. Many people feel that the two fatal attacks on him may have had an impact.

Debate-centered challenges to leadership
Economic concerns have also been emphasized as important in the elections. Rising inflationary costs, increases in loan interest rates, economic harm caused by military aid, and tax policies have all become hotly debated issues. The media is also reporting on Biden's successes and weaknesses. The vice presidential candidate's advocacy in support of Trump is normal. Former President Barack Obama, his wife Michelle Obama, and Hillary Clinton, Trump's former adversary, appear to be aggressively pushing for Kamala.

At the time, the United States is likewise facing a hard test in international affairs. Because of the advent of multipolar powers, the dispute over two polar superpowers is no longer relevant. Previously, there was only competition with Russia, which was referred to as the "two superpowers." Now, the situation is different. If we look at the US's direct interests, we can see that it is balancing North Korea's nuclear tests, China's economic, technological, and military power, Cold War-era competition with Russia, Iran becoming stronger in the Gulf region, Afghanistan successfully displacing the US presence, and nearby Cuba.

China and Russia's collaboration on the African continent may be raising awareness in America and Europe. Furthermore, Israel's security, which is under attack from all sides, may be of concern and interest to the United States, as may Ukraine's defense of its existence, which is at odds with Russia over its membership in the European Union. Protecting Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, and Thailand in the Far East, as well as retaining a strategic presence in Taiwan, would be critical. Except for India and Pakistan, American interest in South Asian countries appears to be typical. Because nations like Nepal, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka are continually demanding monetary assistance, the matter would be resolved only through general strategic support.

In the presidential election, the popular vote of about 170 million Americans is not the sole determining element. Based on the population of the fifty states, a majority of 588 members of the Electoral College is required to win. In other words, 270 electors who choose either Kamala or Trump will be America's leaders for the next four years. Regardless of the degree of allegations leveled during the election, or the nature of the campaign, the electorate's voters will be the most important. Previously, in 2016, Hillary had more popular votes than Trump but did not win. The beauty of democracy is having the power to pick leaders through voting rights. Regardless of which side the American people take, the democratic process will prevail.