The Upcoming US Presidential Elections
Hell Is Other People
An important principle of American politics is derived from Genghis Khan (c. 1162–1227): “It is not enough to defeat the enemy; the enemy must be completely destroyed”. While we don’t see this principle too much at work in mayoral (only 35% of eligible Chicagoans voted in 2023) or county elections, it loudly rears its ugly head in gubernatorial-, senate- and presidential elections.
Our presidential elections — I say “our”, although I am only an inactive voter in Austria where elections are mostly a parodic snooze fest — attract the world’s fearful attention like little else. My earliest memorable experience with US presidents dates from 1975 when Gerald Ford survived an assassination attempt. When Jimmy Carter got elected in 1976, my mother woke me up to tell me that a very weak president would govern the US from now on. In 1980, she was not a fan of Ronald Reagan either — he was expected to bring nuclear war to Europe.
Most decent Europeans (there is a 20% lunatic fringe in every country) are united in their undifferentiated opinion about recent US presidents:
- George W. Bush (the 43rd): bad, mainly because of Iraq
- Barack Obama (the 44th): good, but not great
- Donald Trump (the 45th): very bad, for a very long list of reasons; pretty crazy too
- Joe Biden (the 46th): ok; he beat Trump; Europeans like nice and boring politicians
The US view of our presidents resembles a Rohrschach test with both halves of the population seeing past and present as polar opposites. We don’t know coalitions; we consider consensus a weakness and the center never holds. American elections remain an enigma to the world and to us who live here.
A somewhat misleading spectrum of differentiated explanations
When it comes to US politics, I prefer to follow Nietzsche’s advice: “Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you[i].” When I was new to the country, an immigrant friend recommended that I stay away from the news. It took me a few years to understand the devastating impact that politics can have on the human soul.
Voting behavior is following themes that get condensed into nonsensical political language (Simon Kuper, FT). Fighting evolves along these themes and words become weapons, thereby losing any of their original meaning (fascists against socialists). I say “conservative”, you say “liberal” and we broadly mean something right or left of center, with a decidedly negative connotation (in the mid-80s, I met a man from NYC who couldn’t say the word liberal without spitting on the floor, indoors of course).
All of the following trends can be considered as reasons for our political polarization, but you will dive into the details at a significant risk to your mental health.
Grievances: The left is forever trying to “answer” populist concerns by reshoring industrial jobs or devolving power. It is very sweet, this. And yes, perhaps at the start, populism was about tangible grievances. But once people took sides, around 2016, that group membership started to mean more to them. (As in a long-running war whose original cause is lost on the belligerents.) Trump perceives this more clearly than his rivals. …I am no longer sure that populist voters want to win the culture war. Just being in it gives them meaning. If anything, there is more group identity in losing, more solidarity under siege than in triumph.[ii]
Wokeness: The number one meaningless word right now is “woke”, which is used to signify “any acknowledgment of racism or sexism”, “expressing an opinion while black or female”, or just “a new thing that I don’t like”[iii].
Millenials (1981–1996): In my generation’s perception, this group used to be composed of lazy, entitled and naively left-leaning 16 to 25 year-olds. To many people’s surprise and some people’s detriment, they are now in their early 30s and 40s and they account for the biggest share of our population (21.67%). The next biggest group is Gen-Z (1997–2012) with 20.88%. And yes — both are liberal and slightly or very much left leaning. Luckily, most of Gen-Z is not eligible to vote — yet.
Suburban housewives: A little over 50% of the US (175M people) lives in the suburbs, 98M in the cities and 46M in rural counties. Cities are irreparably democratic (the same is true in Europe), the rural counties are steadfastly Republican and suburban housewives may be a little more Democratic than Republican (and hiding it from their husbands), but they clearly dislike Trump. And he does nothing to endear himself with the group.
Moral decline: The country has been in a moral decline forever. The sentiment is shared across the political spectrum. Since the morals of the other group are always wrong, we are all heading in separate and wrong directions.
Abortion: No other topic but guns mobilizes conservative and especially religious voters more than this one. Interestingly, more Democratic voters identify as religious than Republican voters (44% vs. 37% according to the Pew Research Center).
A balanced budget and economic growth: The economy — measured by the federal budget deficit (5.4%), GDP growth (1.6%), the stock market (up 13% YTD), the level of interest rates (7.5% for a 30-year fixed mortgage rate), inflation (4.9% in April) and unemployment (3.7%) — has never been this bad, says today’s Republican. It’s a mixed bag says the Democrat, but the glass is half-full. Of all developed countries in the world, the US is doing best, says The Economist.
Freedom and weapons: Typically used by US libertarians to signify “my freedom, not yours”. When they invoke “freedom”, they usually mean, “I should be free to do what I like, whether it’s buying a gun, driving my car through your city or not wearing a mask.” They don’t acknowledge the trade-offs; their freedoms restrict other people’s freedom to go outside safely or not catch Covid-19. The case study of “my freedom, not yours” is self-proclaimed “free-speech absolutist” Elon Musk letting authoritarian regimes censor content on Twitter (Simon Kuper, FT).
Crime: It’s very much a big city issue (run by Democrats) and it is the biggest topic in elections. Too bad that nobody wants to pay for solutions, because they require even higher taxes (the murder capital of the United States — my city of Chicago — is spending 11.5% of its $16.4B budget on its police-force). For comparison: my old comparably sized hometown Hamburg in Germany spends 7% on its police force. In 2022, there were 630 homicides and 2,600 shootings in Chicago vs 18 homicides and 100 shootings in Hamburg (knives are a bigger issue). “Guns don’t kill, people do” say my Republican friends.
Rich vs. Poor: Democrat — our society is becoming increasingly and unbearably unequal. The rich don’t pay their fair share. Less than 3% of our GDP could eliminate poverty forever. Republican — what’s wrong with inequality? The IRS — the Top 10% of earners pay 73.7% of all federal income tax, the bottom 50% pay 2.3%.
A shift in the population mix: We are becoming a Hispanic country (not quite yet — 14.5% of eligible voters in 2022, up from 7.4% in 2000), and Hispanics are left-leaning (somewhat true — 65% voted for Biden).
Now, all of this has predictive value, but it doesn’t really explain our polarized attitude towards elections. So please forget the details.
The real causes of our political battles
Partisan fighting isn’t a new phenomenon, but it became institutionalized in the 90s and one man deserves much credit for this — Newt Gingrich:
During his two decades in Congress, he pioneered a style of partisan combat — replete with name-calling, conspiracy theories, and strategic obstructionism — that poisoned America’s political culture and plunged Washington into permanent dysfunction. Gingrich’s career can perhaps be best understood as a grand exercise in devolution — an effort to strip American politics of the civilizing traits it had developed over time and return it to its most primal essence.
The truth is, we enjoy watching politicians beating each other up, and politics isn’t any different than hockey, football, baseball, basketball or soccer. We are a nation of “Team Angry” fighting against “Team Virtuous” and we all want to see our team win, no matter what it takes to achieve this.
The Media and the average voter are conditioned to see politics as a zero-sum game. Winner takes it all and there must be a loser in every transaction. The public reaction to the recent budget consensus proves the point:
- Fox News: Lindsey Graham warns Kevin McCarthy on debt ceiling deal: ‘Biggest winner of Biden defense budget is China’
- The Sacramento Bee: Kevin McCarthy beat President Biden in debt ceiling talks
- The New York Post: Democrats said McCarthy held no cards — he drew an inside straight with House win
- The New York Times: Biden Notches Win on Debt Ceiling Deal, but Lets Others Boast
- MSNBC: Republicans mad at the debt ceiling deal blocked House GOP bills to prevent Biden from banning gas stoves as revenge against Kevin McCarthy
Any decent European soccer fan will understand the principle. A penalty for a foul is only justified for the opposing team. Transgressions by members of the home club have to be seen in light of their immeasurable contributions to the club’s fortunes. Corruption is too harsh a judgement for the necessary activity of cultivating friendships.
Where do we go from here?
The US is a rough country, unequal (but not getting worse, according to Noah Smith) but wealthy and sometimes mind-boggingly dysfunctional. We have a myriad of life-shortening or quality-of-life reducing issues, as in drugs, guns and unaffordable healthcare. We create unnecessary stress for each other by contributing to political dramas, and we are unable and unwilling to change any of this. Nevertheless, we go on to enjoy our lives, grow and prosper, for reasons that remain enigmatic.
Footnotes
[i] Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future (German: Jenseits von Gut und Böse: Vorspiel einer Philosophie der Zukunft), Friedrich Nietzsche, 1886
[ii] “Why DeSantis is losing Republicans to Trump”, by Janan Ganseh, Financial Times, May 30, 2023
[iii] “‘Woke’ and other bogus political terms, decoded”, by Simon Kuper, Financial Times, June 8, 2023
